8 20 5666 https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/1d9b732d1c2e97f1aaee38d5f2a2894b.mp3 3fb35c2059ee2e26cc83e95a0b82943b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Lecture Recordings—Santa Fe Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Meem Library Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data M4A Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:56:47 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Gertrude Stein and the End(s) of Literature Description An account of the resource Audio recording of a lecture given by tutor David Carl on January 24, 2025 as part of the Dean’s Lecture & Concert Series. The Dean’s Office has provided this description of the event: “Tender Buttons is a kind of love story which leads us to ask, “What do we love when we love to read?” Is it a certain meaning or truth that reading can help us achieve, or is it the experience itself—the act rather than the end of reading? And if the latter, how important are meaning and truth to this activity of reading? Tender Buttons is a work of radical literary experimentation, which in its relationship to signification, representation, truth, and meaning is unlike anything we encounter on the St. John’s program (or perhaps, closer to the works we encounter in the music tutorial than to the books we read together in Seminar). This work provides us with an occasion, and a virtually unique perspective from which to investigate our relationship to reading, truth, meaning, beauty, and pleasure. At the very gateway of our introduction to philosophic reflection (Plato’s Republic), Socrates refers to “the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry.” What is this quarrel? Is it a tension between truth and beauty, which poet Keats insisted were one and the same? Must a book’s relationship to truth be mediated primarily through the category of meaning, or is it an experience beyond meaning (perhaps more closely related to a certain kind of (aesthetic) pleasure?) How do we understand the difference between reading as a means to an end (such as truth and understanding) and reading as an end in itself (a certain kind of experience we desire for its own sake, as Aristotle says of happiness)? Using Tender Buttons as an opportunity to reflect on these questions, we will consider the importance (if not the meaning) of a literary work that stands at the beginning of an era of avant-garde aesthetic practices that led to fiction without plot, music without notes (John Cage’s 4’33”), and paintings that consist entirely of black canvases (Ad Reinhardt). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carl, David (David G.), 1967- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-01-24 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online. Type The nature or genre of the resource sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp3 Subject The topic of the resource Stein, Gertrude, 1874-1946. Tender buttons Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SF_CarlD_Gertrude_Stein_and_the_Ends_of_Literature_2025-01-24 Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/09513a3f349c344ce24591b2aa4462a8.pdf cbbc452f9f9d08abb1423114093f6946 PDF Text Text Foundational Urgency and Institutional Inertia* Greg Recco In his Critique of Dialectical Reason, Sartre writes: “man has to struggle not only against nature, and against the social environment which has produced him, and against other men, but also against his own action as it becomes other” (CDR 124). In what follows, I will discuss the reality indicated in this last clause, this tendency of human action to work against itself by establishing structures that block access to the ends it aimed at, what Sartre calls “counterfinality.” Many familiar features of contemporary life exhibit this paradoxical character on a grand scale, perhaps most of all the institutions of government and of the market. These are historic accomplishments and have often seemed to be the only means to attain peace and prosperity. But they have also developed into impediments to human flourishing and freedom. Sartre’s famously recalcitrant text will serve as a guide. It is distinguished by its simultaneous focus on the precise logical shape of social forms and on concrete description of lived social realities “from the inside.” His accounts are unsentimental and unsparing, and it’s difficult to think of anyone who works harder to expose the inherent difficulties of realizing the goals he promotes. In particular, I want to trace out his distinctive account of group action, from the background of inert social formations against which it asserts itself, through its sustaining and diversifying itself into the quasi-vital form of the so-called “organization,” and finally, devolving into its rigid and inert form, which he calls the “institution.” Before these three main parts of the lecture, and by way of introduction, I will discuss some related matters in Plato’s Republic. I do this in part because I presume this audience is generally familiar with that book, * Lecture delivered at St. John’s College, Annapolis on January 10, 2025. 1 �and also because nearly every major theme of Sartre’s work is one that any serious student of the Republic ought to recognize as relevant and important. Part 1: Images of the City Let’s begin with three accounts of the basic character of the city from the Republic. In Book 1, Thrasymachus portrays cities as defined by exploitation: the rulers make laws that they say are just but that serve them at the expense of the ruled. Later, in Book 5, Socrates presents the city as a single sensitive organism, affected by a pain or harm felt in any part, and concerned as a whole to address it. Later still, in Book 8, Socrates portrays cites as protean, changing shape when a group within the city takes power and remolds the regime around its particular ruling principle. Each of these three images of the city (ruse, organism, shapeshifter) highlights something significant. As for the first, Thrasymachus presents his account as something obvious. “Don’t you know,” he asks Socrates incredulously, “that some cities are ruled tyranically, some democratically, and some aristocratically … and that the ruling element is the stronger?” (338de). Since all types of city alike proclaim the laws to be just, if the ruling or stronger element sets down laws that give it an advantage, what is proclaimed to be just is simply whatever is advantageous to them. Stripped of Thrasymachus’ boasting and his abusive language, it’s plausible and even accurately describes many Greek cities riven by internal conflict or stasis. Thucydides’ accounts bear witness to how brutal this factional antagonism became during the war. We’ll return to the question of revolution in relation to Socrates’ account in Book 8 and later in the lecture. But first, it’s worth noting some of Thrasymachus’ unstated presuppositions. The main one, on which Socrates’ response turns, is of course the unexamined nature of the central term “advantage.” This lies somewhat outside our purview, though we’ll return to it later in a different context. Of more immediate interest is the fact that the range of possible constitutions— 2 �tyranny, democracy, aristocracy—is taken for granted, as is the unity of the ruling element in each, and these twin presuppositions are related: in effect, Thrasymachus takes the types of ruling groups and regimes for granted because he assumes they are mutually defining. It’s not clear that much stands behind his analysis besides the fused ideas of class interest, exploitation, and naïveté: the stronger class exploits the weaker and persuades the naïve among them that their being exploited is justice. In Book 5, Socrates presents a different picture. After asserting that whatever unifies the city and binds it together as one is its highest good, he makes an analogy. He says: “when one of us wounds a finger, presumably the entire community—that community tying the body together with the soul in a single arrangement under the ruling part within it—is aware of the fact, and all of it is in pain as a whole along with the afflicted part; and it is in this sense we say that this human being has a pain in his finger” (462c). To be a feeling organism is to identify as a whole with any feeling part—to behave, that is, as a community. Socrates suggests that promoting a similar fellow-feeling among citizens could thus realize the city’s good by binding it together as one. With respect to this second picture of the city, one might well ask just why this mutual sensitivity is necessary. Nothing like it was required in the so-called “healthy city” founded in speech in Book 2. There, mutual benefit and mutual need were evident to all. Harm or pain was not something that needed to be felt, since need was perceived directly: all the arts practiced in the city addressed obvious need by obvious means. What changed since that time, presumably, is that the city’s very success allowed it to grow. This meant an increase in both the population and the number of sorts of jobs: both of these tend to undermine the possibility of mutual awareness. The larger and more differentiated city needs threads of self-awareness to knit together its self- 3 �alienating parts. And those threads don’t grow up naturally in the city, as they do in animals; they must be artificially produced and artfully deployed somehow. This sort of city must make for itself its own “nervous system.” A third picture of the city with respect to the question of its form is offered in Book 8, and it is the most complex by far. I will list only a few of its key features. Having completed the description of the identity and education of the ruling class in the city, Socrates investigates the other forms of constitution as promised back in Book 4. This reopens the question of the variety of constitutions that Thrasymachus introduced earlier as an obvious empirical fact. Socrates’ account, by contrast, is pseudo-historical or mythopoetic: the variety of forms is presented as a sequence, which Socrates calls on the Muses to narrate, in the manner of a poet. It is modeled after the Ages of Man from Hesiod’s Works and Days and accordingly differs from Thrasymachus’ account by distinguishing five instead of three regimes, adding oligarchy and the so-called “timocracy” to what Thrasymachus put under the single name “aristocracy,” as well as adding a fourth symbolic metal and an age of heroes. This further differentiation is ultimately due to the identification of a “formal cause” in each case: oligarchy, for example, is not essentially the rule of some or few, but a society organized around the single principle of wealth, like ours today. Socrates’ account is also dialectical or tragic, in that each regime is vulnerable to, or even ultimately responsible for, its own destruction. This is true throughout the series, but is made most explicit in the cases of oligarchy and democracy, both of which are said to suffer from an insatiate desire for their defining principle, which is also the cause of that destruction. Socrates’ account of the collapse of the oligarchic regime may be the clearest. For one, the so-called rulers have no interest in ruling, and no aptitude or appetite for it, either, and so he refers to them not as rulers, but simply as “money-makers.” Furthermore, the city is no longer 4 �one, but divided into rich and poor, inasmuch as it allows citizens to fall into complete poverty and lack of necessary resource. This is no accident, as the oligarchs actively pursue the project of getting even richer through impoverishing any they can. Socrates presents this characteristic activity of oligarchy as something with a side effect: it tends to produce a class of dangerous potential revolutionaries, people with nothing to lose and everything to gain from a change of regime. And he describes the oligarchs themselves as unconscious of this danger: they individually extract wealth from others “with their heads bent down, not seeming to see those men” (555e). Through their own action, then, they unwittingly became their own worst enemies, creating the conditions for their destruction. In part, it’s because their desire and its object were both pursued as something limitless: like a pure quantity. But the account also highlights the way that individual acts can have systemic repercussions. Finally, it’s worth considering another thread in the story: in a self-congratulatory mood, the oligarchs would probably describe their signal virtue as moderation. In much the same manner as he rudely asks Cephalus about his wealth when the latter prides himself on his character, Socrates doesn’t make much of this talk of moderation, and accurately describes what oligarchy really holds up as the good. Whatever it may say about itself, the real meaning of this form of government is limitless wealth for a few and its associated and widespread poverty for the rest. This picture of the city that emerges from Book 8 is considerably more elaborate than Thrasymachus’ account of exploitation. It doesn’t simple-mindedly deny that obvious reality, as he supposes, but it gives it a different context and a different fate. For one thing, the dominant party in the oligarchy (along with its self-serving self-understanding) is in a way produced by the regime; the honor-lovers of the timocracy sought to please themselves and hoarded money 5 �privately, it’s true, but the change into a regime explicitly defined by a minimum property qualification is a fundamental transformation in the very meaning of being a ruler; if there were any real honor-lovers among them, one imagines they would have felt this as the degradation it was. For another thing, and directly contrary to Thrasymachus’ definition, it is the oligarchs’ pursuit of their supposed “advantage” that undoes them. Anything like the organism’s perception of harm characteristic of the second picture of the city seems to be lacking; the oligarchs seem to enrich themselves almost mechanically, numb to the harm they are doing to their regime and to themselves. Part 2: Fractious Unity as Action’s Shadow Turning now to Sartre, let’s study further the phenomena of action’s self-sabotage. Let me first identify some of his particular terminology: what we will be studying in general he calls “matter as inverted praxis,” the social forms we’ll next study he calls “collectives,” and these are characterized by a structure he calls “seriality.” Concerning “matter as inverted praxis,” he has a couple of striking historical examples ready to hand. The first is the example of agricultural deforestation leading to flooding, which he takes from René Grousset’s history of China, the second, the devaluation of Spanish currency due to the importation of precious metals in the 16 th century, for which he relies on Fernand Braudel. In both cases, Sartre highlights how deliberate action directed at meeting human need “inscribes” itself, as it were, into the matter it works on. That worked matter can then turn against us, presenting us not with the reflection of our own activity as we understood it, but with the face of an enemy. As for the first example, each individual peasant in an effort to make use of the land he worked for planting crops cleared trees from it, but the aggregate effect of these individual 6 �actions over centuries was to create a landscape especially vulnerable to destructive flooding. Sartre indicates the dramatic character of this inversion of praxis as follows: If some enemy of mankind had wanted to persecute the peasants of the Great Plain, he would have ordered mercenary troops to deforest the mountains systematically. The positive system of agriculture was transformed into an infernal machine. But the enemy [fueling the machine] was the peasant himself. Yet, taken in the moment of its living development, his action does not include this rebound, either intentionally or in reality. In this particular place, and for this particular man cultivating his land, all that existed was an organic connection between the negative (removal of the obstacle) and the positive (enlargement of the arable sector)…. [H]uman labour, [then], is enriched with new meanings precisely to the extent that it eludes the labourer through its materiality. (162, 164) It’s worth noting in passing that the correction of this individually produced material selfsabotage necessarily becomes a common project. With characteristic brevity, Sartre says this correction entails “large-scale public works, population shifts, the implacable authority of the leaders, etc.” (165). The brief “etcetera” stands in for the manifold social ramifications of this reorganization, and particularly their ambiguity. The material rebound of a mass of individual actions prompted a collective response, but thereby it also occasioned new tasks, new configurations of cooperation, new centers of organization and power, and these had their own materiality, their own fixity, imposed their own exigencies, and so on. The second example of matter as inverted praxis concerns the effects of Spain’s success at extracting gold and silver from the Americas. In the last decades of the 16 th century in particular, the discovery and exploitation of silver mines in Peru vastly accelerated this ongoing project, which included perfecting the techniques of extraction, refinement, transport, and minting into currency. The result of this acceleration was an unsuspected disruption and weakening of the Spanish economy, and indeed the economy of the Mediterranean in general. In 7 �broad terms, this kind of monetary phenomenon is now widely understood, but imagine living it without that knowledge, bewildered, and as if cursed. The same opposition between individual action and aggregate result that we saw in the case of deforestation is present here, too. Sartre writes: Here, and for this particular merchant, whatever the circumstances and however prices may fluctuate, it is still true that he will be richer this evening if he gets an extra thousand ducats. But in the process as a whole it is not the case that collectivities are enriched by accumulation…. While for him every new quantity increases his wealth, in the national community it devalues the unit. (171, 173) In general, then, our involvement and commerce with matter, our praxis, tends to reveal a hidden connectedness to our action, one that is in principle unsuspected and can even run directly counter to our aims, with repercussions for social structures. Sartre sums up the principle as follows: Thus materialised praxis (the minted coin, etc.) has the effect of uniting men precisely to the extent that it separates them by imposing on everyone a meaningful reality infinitely richer and more contradictory than they anticipated individually. Materialised practices, poured into the exteriority of things, impose a common destiny on men who know nothing of one another, and, at the same time, by their very being, they reflect and reinforce the separation of individuals. (179) This uniting has been the main theme in these examples of matter as inverted praxis, inasmuch as they reveal a common threat calling for a common response, but the aspect of separation has so far been mostly implicit. Let me turn now to Sartre’s direct engagement with this latter theme in his discussion of collectives constituted by seriality. He elaborates it by means of a graded sequence of examples. We’ll consider only the first and simplest: the gathering of commuters lining up at a bus stop, and the audience of a radio broadcast. 8 �At a Parisian bus stop, commuters gather. Though they have come together in the same place, they mostly ignore one another. Their purpose is the same for each, but not shared. Their isolation from one another might almost seem to be a natural product of the city itself, which concentrates people in a mass, but at the same time tends to diversify and alienate their pursuits and ways of life. The city’s unity is present to all of them as something abstract, indifferent to these differences. People at the bus stop may deliberately adopt this indifference, buying a newspaper to read so as not to have to interact with others. In this sense, their “isolation is a project” (258). They are all waiting for the same bus, and are thus united by this single material object, but the bus addresses them, as it were, as interchangeable, and thus addresses each one as inessential. Also, there is a limited number of seats available and a real likelihood that there will be no room for some to board the next bus. In Paris in the 1950’s, the system was to take a numbered ticket upon arrival at the stop and to board the bus in the order of arrival. This particular system happens to elucidate the social form in question neatly: the commuters gathered at the stop in this way are constituted as a series. In a first take on this notion of series, Sartre refers obliquely to Peano’s axiomatic definition of number by means of a successor function rather than through a general definition. If we allow the exception of zero as a starting point, it can be said that every whole number is the successor of another. The statement is universal in form, but it doesn’t exactly assert a common feature of each, except its difference. Each number, then, is defined, not by itself, but through all the others. In the human realm, whatever the mode of ordering, the meaning of being constituted as a member of a series is the same: each is defined not by a common feature, but by being the other of all the others. At the bus stop, this means exclusion: my taking a seat can always mean depriving another of a seat, and every other who is earlier in the series can be the last one 9 �allowed to board, and thereby deprive me. The rule that decides our respective fates—the number on the ticket—is both perfectly clear and perfectly arbitrary, and thus, in following it, we all accept and share the same otherness. In the earlier examples, too, we can see this structure of serial alterity at work. Every deforester is a flood-producer, every spender a devaluer, each is the other of all the others, working against them and himself in his very work, “with his head bent down,” as it were. Consider, next, the experience of listening to a radio broadcast. Superficially, my behavior resembles the role I take up in turns in normal conversation with others: while they are speaking, I am listening. But there’s a crucial difference: in listening to a broadcast, I am utterly passive, even if I am moved to “talk back” or even shout. My speech has no influence over what’s being said, and not just accidentally. A voice on the radio, as such, is something over which I can have no influence. Perhaps I can write a letter to the broadcaster or the government complaining about the content. But this has no effect in the moment, and even with sufficient time, it can only have an effect if many, many others also do the same (and if their voices count). I can, of course, turn the radio off or change the station. But this, too, fails to alter what is essentially at issue. Sartre writes: This purely individual activity changes absolutely nothing in the real work of this voice. It will continue to echo through millions of rooms and to be heard by millions of listeners; I will merely have rushed into the ineffective, abstract isolation of private life, objectively changing nothing. I will not have negated the voice; I will have negated myself as an individual member of the gathering. (272) What’s really at issue, then, what really makes the bad broadcast unbearable for me as a listener, is this shadowy gathering of other listeners, distant from me, unreachable. I may fear the voice will convince them, and in this, I feel my utter powerlessness. To have the effect I imagine 10 �opposing to that of the powerful voice, I’d have to persuade each of the other listeners one by one, in their millions. And I, as another listener, am the same for them. If they are listening to the broadcast that says things I favor, they, too, listen impotently, imagining me, unreachable, in the thrall of the alien voice. Sartre writes: “when … one listens to the voice in impotent anger, one no longer listens to it for oneself … , but from the point of view of Others” (273). Finally, unlike the gathering at the bus stop, this one involves in principle an indefinite number of others. Nothing in the voice itself tells me how many are listening or which are convinced; it merely adumbrates a diffuse mass of mutual alterities, a plurality of isolations. Just as in the case of the bus stop, the radio, as a materialized praxis affected by seriality, unites people at the same time that it reflects and reinforces their separation. Each is constituted as the other for all the others and, within the system, within the vast reality that is broadcast media, that is all they can be to one another (indeed, even if they’re on the same “side”). In the cases of deforestation leading to flooding, and imports of precious metals leading to devaluation, the counter-finality is clear: both achieved something opposed to what they aimed at and in each case it was clear what was to be resisted, even if the how of it wasn’t. The two cases of collectives, the bus stop and the radio, are more ambiguous. Even in their relative simplicity, they testify to the manifold, ramified, subterranean bonds of our connectedness. That, at least, is not to be undone. But must the mode of our connection be separation and powerlessness? How can these be overcome? Part 3: The Group, or Immaterial Matter Sartre starts his examination of the group with an example that is conceptually simple, if historically very specific, the storming of the Bastille. It’s the first of a kind of three-part narrativization of the development of the concept of a group, but it isn’t meant to have a 11 �universal or foundational status. Nonetheless, because of its relative simplicity, which I will amplify by further simplification, it’s a clear example of how a group can come into being despite, and as a reaction against, dispersed seriality. This group is formed through a kind of fusion. In July of 1789, the people of Paris were already being treated as a hostile entity; the city was surrounded by an army, and though the king insisted its presence was for the purpose of protection against roaming bandits, the situation inevitably led to Parisians themselves being fired on and killed. This led residents to loot arsenals for arms with which to defend themselves. Though retrospectively, this would take on the color of a revolutionary act, Sartre insists it should not at first be understood as an organized common action: “It was a collective action: everyone was forced to arm himself by others’ attempts to find arms, and everyone tried to get there before the Others” (355, my emphasis). They were not unified, but a few key features of their situation soon occasioned their spontaneously acting as one and thereby becoming one. For one thing, the encirclement of the city by troops on the king’s orders and the posting of notices of this action throughout the city served to designate them as a unit. Next, the electoral assembly sought to form militias within each district of the city, ostensibly for the purpose of avoiding “disturbances,” but actually for disarming people who had previously been arming themselves out of their individual fears; this, too, “helped the gathering to perceive its reality as an organised being” (356). Finally, the apparent misinformation by an official which resulted in an angry crowd opening boxes they were assured would contain arms only to find nothing but rags enraged them; it seemed to imply that they were being treated as a unit, only one worthy of being deceived. A practical result of all this was an atmosphere of real unrest in which Parisians would regularly go out into the streets and constitute gatherings, “anywhere, anyhow” (369), 12 �though without any clearly defined purpose. The most frequent result of such directionless gatherings was a march, followed by panic and flight as they were dispersed and pursued. It is in imaginatively describing the experience of someone caught up such a situation that Sartre finds the ground of the crucial transformation. If I reside in the Quartier Saint-Antoine and my lived experience of residing there is the alienated urban attitude embodied in slogans such as “every man for himself,” and if also I hear rumors that the militias or the soldiers are planning to enter my district and “flush it out,” putting all its residents in danger, I live between two perspectives. The former is the isolated perspective of chacun pour soi, and the latter is a sort of unification of the neighborhood as a single object for what Sartre repeatedly refers to as a “third-party” perspective, mediating between the neighborhood and the government, both of which I’d speak of in the third person. But if I happen to be in the street when some shots are fired, and find myself running for my life, and others are running, too, I find myself serially engaged in the very action that I simultaneously perceive from the latter perspective as the organized action of my neighbors. It is from the practical fusion of these two perspectives—one within the situation and one without, one immanent and one transcendent—that the so-called “fused group” comes into being. I may at first have been trying to do what the others do out of a kind of panicked imitation, in order not to get left behind and be exposed to the pursuers as a single individual, but I end up doing something we can all construe as a common action. On this account, proximity, mutual visibility, mortal urgency, and sufficient numbers conspired to make it possible for a group to spontaneously constitute itself as one, in practice, and to discover a new common aim for its fresh unity: to get to the Bastille, disarm it as a center from which the soldiers might attack the district, and use it as a source of weapons, perhaps even as a stronghold. 13 �Again, those who were caught up in this developing and consequential action were helped to adopt this new perspective by both the inescapability of danger and the prospect of success as the crowds grew more numerous. Previously, in seriality, quantity itself was something as if “bewitched”—more gold flowing in made mine worth less, and more people seizing weapons could mean none left for me. Now, in the group, self-endowed with a common aim, the meaning of quantity is transformed into something positive. Here, when anyone—from their unifying third-party perspective—sees others joining the ranks, they are also seen by the others in the same way. Each adds to the other’s strength, again, giving hope of success. Furthermore, and crucially, anyone with the “totalizing” perspective of the third party, that is, the perspective that sees the group as a whole with a common aim, is in a position to direct the group. This is in a way a view from without, but it’s not a view “from above” in the sense of constituting an external authority. Indeed, every member of the fused group possesses that perspective and is in a position to direct it, and the group depends on this kind of distributed perception and direction. If I see that we are running into a trap, I may shout “Stop!” as I am stopping, and the group stops. This has the grammatical form of an order, but it’s not quite right to say it compels obedience. Sartre writes: “Who would be obeying? And whom? It is simply the common praxis becoming regulatory of itself in some third party” (380). In the serial interchangeability of this role, it seems scarcely different from what Aristotle describes in his Politics as “ruling and being ruled in turn.” This felicitous and spontaneous group is not the last word in common action: the urgency with which it came into being is prone to subside, especially if the group is successful at driving back or dissolving the threats that prompted its unification. While the group was originally constituted as a means to survival, if it itself is to survive, it must preserve its efficacy beyond the 14 �moment of obvious threat. This it can only do by transforming itself fundamentally, into what Sartre calls a “statutory group,” by means of an essential act. Each member swears a solemn oath, affirming that he will continue to act on behalf of the group, and submitting himself to its jurisdiction if he should not, thereby binding not only himself, but all the others to perpetual solidarity. The group thus survives by making itself a potential wielder of the violence with which it was originally threatened, artificially repeating, as it were, the life-and-death urgency of the moment of its foundation and extending it into the future. This, too, is something like a matter of necessity, in that the group is always liable to lapse into one or another mode of failure and nothing guarantees that it won’t: on the one hand, any member might defect, at any time; on the other, anyone who takes up at a given time the role of directing the group may abuse that authority and use the group for his own ends. The oath or pledge faces both these dangers by placing all on the same level of authority and responsibility to one another. By means of the pledge, the group makes itself its own tool and tries to give itself the status of enduring substance. By the very means it uses—that is, the threat of deadly violence for traitors—the group becomes a potential instrument of terror, even when that possibility is concealed by great affection, or, in the republican slogan, “fraternité.” While the resurgence of that implicit threat of fraternal terror in a long-established group would be a sign of decay into authoritarianism, for the group that has just formed itself in response to a deadly threat and for which any betrayal could easily revive that threat, it is understandable in its necessity. What can the surviving group become? Part 4: Two Futures: Organization and Institution Just as in Book 8 of the Republic, the analysis of types of group here follows a logic that is not historical, but is presented nonetheless as a sequence of transformations: the fused group is 15 �simplest and for that reason, it’s easy to understand the statutory group formed by means of the pledge as a kind of transformation of it. In this final section, we’ll fit two other forms into this story, organization and institution, and present them as two futures made possible by the pledge. Having survived the moment of urgency and won for itself the leisure of relative stability, the group has made itself capable of a further transformation, into an “organization.” The word itself has a telling ambiguity, naming both an activity of structuring, and the thing itself that is structured. With reference to the first, active meaning, the group whose members have pledged to stay in it is no longer defined by the single urgent and common goal of immediate survival; it can diversify its activity, turn to different tasks, and assign them to different members. This division of labor is in a way given by the overall relation of the group to things, and that’s as much as to say that its internal complexity is equivalent to the complexity of its dealings with the world. But this is necessarily a developing and ever-incomplete relation, for reasons we’ve already seen. And it acquires a new, reflexive character as the second, passive sense of the word “organization” comes into play: the organization, as a particular way of distributing tasks, as something structured, is thereby something inertial, something like a materialized praxis. Like worked matter that can turn against us, the organization’s own structure is something it will forever have to grapple with, insofar as that is something it has made itself responsible for. Let’s first consider the active, verbal sense of organization, and then point out aspects of its passive structure that leave it vulnerable to transforming into an institution. First, the pledge gave everyone in the group juridical power over the others, but that power was negative and abstract: “Don’t do anything that would go against the group,” it says; this is negative in that it’s a prohibition and abstract in that it doesn’t specify the “anything against the group” any further. The organization, by contrast, gives a regulatory power that is 16 �positive and concrete, through the idea of each member’s having or performing a function: “Do this that the group requires,” it says, positively demanding a particular action. One belongs to the group in so far as one carries out a certain task. This is not so different from Socrates’ casual discussion of the minimal, “healthy” city of Book 2, which mostly involves listing a variety of jobs. Second, in the organization constituted in this atmosphere of mutual regulation of differentiated tasks, rights and duties are not separate. What counts as “my due” is due to me for the sake of our common objective; it’s something I demand both from the group and for the group. I have a right, as it were, to be made capable of carrying out my duty. A specialized job may require specialized training or support. Whatever the group demands, it must demand in a way that does not make my accomplishing it impossible. In Republic Book 1, Socrates distinguishes between arts that serve and what he calls the “wage-earner’s art,” by which the practitioner of one of the other arts procures something for himself, a fee or wage. The doctor who both treats patients and receives a fee, he says, practices two arts. To say that, in the organization, rights and duties are not separate is to say that no such distinction is present here. Socrates’ reasons for introducing the wage-earner’s art are complex, but I’d argue they mostly have to do with responding to Thrasymachus’s claim that all cities are exploitative and that what the city says is just is, for the ruled, only ever “the good of another.” The organization, by contrast, is not essentially—or better, it is essentially not—a situation of exploitation. The fact that it could ever exist is a fact of great historical significance. In the organization, all are equally rulers and ruled: there is no gap, say, between one who organizes and one who is organized; no one accepts their functional role as fundamentally different from that of an organizer. We both have our jobs. 17 �Third, and finally, the organization depends essentially on individual practice, in a specific sense. As a simple example, take a particular position on a team in a well-defined sport; the individual midfielder, say, makes moves that in one sense have their meaning elsewhere, that is, in the way they are taken up by the other players on the team to realize the team’s common objective. But in another sense, they represent something like a guess that can only be made by someone who sees the field, her teammates, the opposing team, etc., from her individual position. Her move, accordingly, should not be a rote performance of a completely determinate function, but an individual transformation of the field of possibilities; that is what is really demanded from her, and that means something like a transcendence of function. The team needs not just a midfielder, a goalkeeper, etc., but good ones, not the minimum, but excellence. All this by way of saying that organizationally differentiated function can only specify in a general way what one’s job is. It is a hypothetical necessity, never a categorical one, and the choice of means is surrounded with a kind of halo of indeterminacy. To use Sartre’s terms, the work of the organized group is a “totalization” and not a “totality”: it’s a perpetually renewed project of becoming-whole, not a completed project of being-whole. The goal of the organized group is an essentially open project. When all goes well, it harmoniously combines the logical moments of universality (through the common objective), particularity (through the differentiated functions), and singularity (through the role of individual praxis). The simple example of a team sport is useful for bringing out this need for individual practice and the free transformation of roles that can occur from moment to moment, in other words, “organization” as a self-structuring action of the group on itself. But the result of this activity carried further is something materialized, something inertial, something potentially counter-final. In a more complex and established organization, there are bound to be 18 �disagreements between sub-groups about what to do, and about who or what department is necessary, or adequately staffed, or overfunded, and so forth. While the issues are fundamentally “objective structures of the practical problem that has to be solved,” they can also become subjective tokens of internal division. The group must produce its own ways of dealing with all this, its own organs of mediation, supervision, inspection, something like the “nervous system” imagined in Republic Book 5. Sartre asks us to imagine a high-level bureaucrat appointed to an ad hoc position created to deal with a crisis of city traffic. Many distinct goals are at play and the crisis involves how they conflict with one another in the world: there’s a need for parking, but there’s also a need for streets to be open for driving. The specific knowledge required to succeed here is relatively more logistical and combinatorial than others, and any effective solutions will likely involve consequences for many others, indeed, for everyone in the city (grouped or not). In itself, a mediating or even supervisory role like this is no contradiction to the notion of organization; jobs can be differentiated laterally or vertically. But the meaning of those differentiations, initially neutral, tends as though of itself towards two modes of failure: a concentration of unaccountable power, or a disavowal of the moment of individuality. Ultimately, both are rejections of freedom in favor of what we’re calling “institution.” To the extent that our “traffic czar” is appointed as an expert, he can become identified with and wedded to his own solution. His individuality is plainly essential for the role, but that is still the very thing that makes this sort of betrayal a real possibility. Through the pledge, paradoxically, what eludes the member is being-in-the-group, in the full sense of being; one who was just a “mode of a substance,” in Spinoza’s sense, would not need to swear an oath not to have a separate reality, but a free person must. When that merely implicit tension comes to the 19 �fore, it can happen that freedom—the very thing the group sheltered, nurtured, and developed— becomes afraid of itself. Free individuality can come to be seen as an obstacle, and the group can imagine itself as originally pure and in need of purification. In the vehemence of punishment towards one who has betrayed the group, Sartre claims, we can see a psychological projection of this imagined purity: “In a traitor, everyone finds … his own permanent possibility of betraying and being betrayed, and believes he is destroying it forever” (589). In our example, a person in a high-level role can end up giving a shape to the group’s “solution” that belongs to him more than to the group, and may even set ineffective practices and structures in stone. Alternatively, the role could be sacrificial, set up in order to fail in such a way as to deflect blame from others who are wedded to structures that would have to change and from which they benefit. An occupant of this latter position who looks to the future of his career may do all he can to disavow responsibility, to dissociate his individuality from it, perhaps by appealing to putatively objective metrics, rubrics, and standards of evaluation that exonerate him, assuring the public or his superiors that no one could solve the problem as it exists. Both these failure modes are possible anywhere, but the second can also be prompted by having to be a mediator of a different sort, not in an administrative, but in a “public-facing” role. For itself, the organization may be an ongoing project of totalization; for those outside it, it is a totality. For example, the “users” of a service, such as the postal service, see and often treat the individuals who do the job as inessential instruments, if not simply as obstacles to their freedom. Membership in the group is thus experienced in a different way. If you’re a clerk, someone may say to you “do your job!” but not mean it in the same regulatory way as a sworn group member, a colleague, who is equally subject to such an order from you. Being treated by a customer in this way as a sort of “drone” can have an effect: as a mediator between the group and those outside it, 20 �you can become motivated to seek protection behind the public’s perception of your inessentiality. Stated like this, it might sound like a matter of individual psychology or selfconfidence. Maybe. But the experience of self-alienation described here can result from doing one’s job as it is defined. The postal service, after all, is meant to handle everyone’s mail, and in trying to unify disparate domains fraught with their own conflicting material demands, in being faced with a collectivized public, an organized group can respond to this pressure by freezing, asserting its current material configuration as essential. The motto of an employee at this nexus, their saving word, is: “I’m sorry, sir, but that’s our policy.” The organization’s self-protective response to threats, again, is to freeze its own selfdeveloped organs, functions, and powers—to transform them into “institutions.” To save itself, the community tries to recover lost unity through sclerosis. It becomes a “degraded” group, composed of ambiguously situated persons whose safety is meant to come from the rigid definition of their role, or from their role being shielded from external criticism, or at least from criticism from the sides or below. When a position or a practice becomes uncriticizable by any third party without completely disrupting the whole, the group has frozen into an institutional form. The mutuality of regulatory third parties in the statutory group and in the organization has been lost. In this, the meaning of the pledge is completely altered: it is now mere submission to an untranscendable other, violence without reciprocity. Sartre writes: “The moment of common degradation in which the institution emerges is precisely that in which everyone aims to expel freedom from himself in order to realize the endangered unity of the declining group as a thing” (606). And a few pages later: “The institutional system presents itself, by a permanent mystification, in its inorganic-being,” in its thinghood, “as the real unity of the declining group” (608). At many levels, in small and large ways, but especially and most consequentially at the 21 �most authoritative and most mystified levels of the state and civil society, this kind of degraded system is what human praxis has made of itself today. We seem to exist for it, rather than it for us. It’s the real thing, and we are only its servants, unless we’re among the ever-diminishing number of those to whose benefit it has been carefully bent. If this were the only arrangement that is possible, then Thrasymachus might be right about cities, or the account in Book 8, saying that it will all end in tyranny, might be prophetic. But I think we can understand this selfprotective myth of thinghood, this disavowal of freedom, this willed isolation and return to seriality, not as fate or a curse, but as freedom’s own product: our “own action,” as Sartre puts it, “as it becomes other.” If we can understand it in that way, if we can struggle against it, it can never have for us anything like the meaning of destiny. A better world is possible. 22 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 22 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Foundational Urgency and Institutional Inertia Description An account of the resource Typescript of a lecture delivered on January 10, 2025, by Annapolis tutor Greg Recco as part of the Formal Lecture Series. <br /><br />Mr. Recco offers this description: This lecture will examine the difficulty of sustaining collective action. In working together, we respond to exigent circumstances, but the social structures we thereby create have exigencies of their own. To the student of history, it can even seem inevitable that temporary triumph yield to eventual failure. Central chapters of Jean-Paul Sartre's <em>Critique of Dialectical Reason</em> will help illuminate essential reasons for the tendency of effective groups to turn into ineffective institutions, and some remarks on Plato's <em>Republic</em> (particularly Books 1 and 8) will frame the inquiry. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Recco, Gregory Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-01-10 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College has permission to make this item available online. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource Sartre, Jean-Paul, 1905-1980. Critique de la raison dialectique. Plato. Republic Political science--Philosophy Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Recco_Greg_2025-01-10 Friday night lecture Tutors https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/5959cb5959464bd07159a68a98cb4b9e.pdf d6a58d8448e0df43472ebff4ae4f79dc PDF Text Text ǴA *�K2 �+`Qbb i?2 P+2�MǴ Production This transcription of "I Came Across the Ocean" from the Eva Brann Collection was created using 6`QKh?2S�;2 hBiH2, ǴA *�K2 �+`Qbb i?2 P+2�MǴ *`2�i2/ PM, kyk9@RR@Rj RN,yj,k8 lh* R k �R A *�J1 �*_Paa i?2 P*1�L #v 1o� "_�LL j 9 �k (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Ny :QQ/ A *�J1 �*_Paa h?2 P*1�L #v 1p� "`�MM C�Mm�`v Ry- RN99 8 e �j (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) R A /2/B+�i2 i?Bb #QQF iQ Kv KQi?2` �M/ 7�i?2`- rBi?Qmi r?QK A +QmH/ M2p2` ?�p2 r`Bii2M i?Bb �miQ#BQ;`�T?v Q` ?�p2 K�/2 Bi �b 7mHH Q7 rQM/2`7mH K2KQ`B2b �b Bi BbX h?2 �mi?Q` d 3 �9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) k h�#H2 Q7 *QMi2MibX AX % J22i Jv 6�KBHv % TX j AAX % �#Qmi J2 �b � GBiiH2 :B`H % TX e AAAX % LQ *�HK "27Q`2 i?2 aiQ`K % TX RN AoX % AM L�xB :2`K�Mv @ �M/ � q�` _�;BM; % TX k9 oX % �+`Qbb i?2 P+2�M % TX 9R oAX % �K2`B+� % TX eN oAAX %GQQFBM; AMiQ i?2 *`vbi�H "�HH % TX dk N Ry �8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) j AX J22i Jv 6�KBHvX h?2`2 Bb BM Kv 7�KBHv � bBHp2` ?�M/- bm+? �b Bb mb2/ #v C2rb iQ TQBMi Qmi rQ`/b BM i?2B` ;`2�i2bi #QQF- i?2 h?Q`�?X PM i?Bb ?�M/ Bb � >2#`2r BMb+`BTiBQMbi�iBM; i?�i Bi #2HQM;b iQ i?2 7�KBHv Q7 "2M _�##B �+FB#� L�@@@ L�2@@ ULQ QM2 `2K2K#2`b i?2 H�bi M�K2b bBM+2 i?2 ?�M/ Bb MQi rBi? mb RR Rk �e (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9 /m2 iQ r�`V r?Q Bb Q7 i?2 7�KBHv Q7 EBM; .�pB/X A7 vQm i�F2 i?2 BMBiB�Hb Q7 i?Bb 7�KQmb `�##B vQm rBHH ;2i "@_@�@L@L r?B+? Bb Kv H�bi M�K2X A rQmH/ `�i?2` MQi TB+F Kv T�`2Mi^b +?�`�+i2` �M/ /BbTQbBiBQM �T�`i- #mi Dmbi b�v i?�i i?2v �`2 i?2 #2bi BM i?2 rQ`H/X Jv #`Qi?2` /Q2b MQi M22/ /2b+`BTiBQM ?2`2X >2 rBHH �TT2�` Q7i2M BM i?2 Rj R9 �d (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8 7QHHQrBM; T�;2bX >2 r�b #Q`M i?`22 v2�`b �7i2` K2 �M/ M�K2/ qQH7;�M;X LQr r2 +�HH ?BK qBHHB�K #2+�mb2 r2 �`2 BM �K2`B+�X A Kvb2H7 r�b #Q`M QM C�Mm�`v kR- RNkN BM "2`HBM- :2`K�Mv- �M/ M�K2/ 1p� hQMB >2H2M2X R8 Re �3 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) e AAX �#Qmi J2 �b � GBiiH2 :B`HX aQK2r?2`2 BM "2`HBM- BM � p2`v #2�miB7mH bi`22i- Bb � HBiiH2 ?Qmb2X �b A `2K2K#2` Bi- `Qb2b +Qp2` i?2 2Mi`�M+2- HBH�+b #HQQK BM i?2 #�+F- �M/ � #B`+?@i`22 `2�+?2b 7�` mT BMiQ i?2 bFv- `2KBM/BM; K2 Q7 � bQM; r?B+? A HQp2X h?2`2 �`2 K2KQ`B2b �`QmM/ 2p2`v i`22 BM i?2 ;�`/2M �M/ 2p2`v `QQK BM i?2 ?Qmb2X Jv KQi?2`- Kv 7�i?2`- �M/ Rd R3 �N (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) d qBHHB�K �M/ A HQp2 i?Bb ?Qmb2X A7 r2 bi�v2/ �r�v � ?mM/`2/ v2�`b r2 rQmH/ biBHH HQp2 Bi �M/ Bi rQmH/ biBHH #2 Qm` ?QK2X J�Mv i?BM;b ?�TT2M2/ BM i?Bb ?Qmb2- p2`v BKTQ`i�Mi iQ K2- #mi MQi p2`v BMi2`@ 2biBM; iQ i?2 `2�/2`- A �K bm`2X aQ A b?�HH r`Bi2 �#Qmi bQK2i?BM;- BKTQ`i�Mi BM M2�`Hv 2p2`v ;B`H^b HB72- Kv /QHHX A MQr `2H�i2 iQ vQm � rQ27mH biQ`vX ǴS2i2` Bb #HBM/ RN ky �Ry (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 3 �M/ Kmbi b22 � /Q+iQ`-Ǵ b�B/ Kv #`Qi?2` BMMQ+2MiHv- S2i2` r�b � #B; #�#v@/QHHMQi i?2 `�;;2/ +`2�im`2 i?�i ;B`Hb mbm�HHv HQp2X >2 HQQF2/ bQ Km+? HBF2 � #�#v i?�i K�Mv T2QTH2 KBbiQQF ?BK 7Q` QM2- BM 7�+i- A ?�i2 iQ �/KBi i?�i ?2 r�bM^i QM2X q?�i ?�/ Kv #`Qi?2` b�B/\ A Kmbi ;Q �M/ HQQFX A `mb?2/ mT iQ i?2 TH�+2 r?2`2 A ?�/ Tmi #�#v iQ bH22T- 2tT2+iBM; i?2 rQ`biX kR kk �RR (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) N q?�i K2i Kv 2v2b r�b bQ ?Q``B#H2 i?�i A /�`2/ MQi HQQF � b2+QM/ iBK2X AMbi2�/ Q7 Kv #Qv^b #2�miB7mH #`QrM 2v2b A b�r m;Hv #H�+F ?QH2bX A biBHH i?Qm;?i Q7 i?�i ?2�/ rBi?Qmi 2v2b �b A im`M2/ �r�v �M/ +`B2/X h?2M S2i2` /Bb�TT2�`2/ �M/ A i?Qm;?i A rQmH/ M2p2` b22 ?BK �;�BM- #mi QM2 KQ`MBM; r?2M A b�i mT BM #2/- A i?Qm;?i Kv 2v2b r2`2 /2+2BpBM; K2X h?2`2 b�i S2i2`- HQQFBM; �i kj k9 �Rk (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Ry K2 rBi? i?2 KQbi #2�mBi7mH- #`B;?i2bi- #`QrM 2v2b BM i?2 rQ`H/X A r�bM^i � HBiiH2- ;QQ/ ;B`H- +QM+2`M2/ QMHv rBi? /QHHbX AM 7�+i- A ?�i2/ i?Qb2 ;B`Hb�M/ 2p2`viBK2 A ;Qi � #QQF �#Qmi i?2K- Qmi Bi r2MiX A ?�/ p2`v ;QQ/ iBK2b /QBM; i?2 r`QM; i?BM;b- bQ A ?�/ bQK2 ;QQ/ H2bbQMb +QKBM; iQ K2X A H2�`M2/ i?2 ?�`/ r�v- r?B+? /Q2bM^i K2�M i?�i A k8 ke �Rj (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) RR `2K2K#2`X Jv biQK�+? ?�b �Hr�vb #22M i?2 KQbi b2MbBiBp2 T�`i Q7 Kv #Q/v�M/ i?2`27Q`2 A `2K2K#2` i?2 7QHHQrBM; BM+B/2Mi �M/ H2bbQMX A HBF2 bi`�r#2``B2b BM KBHF- �M/ QM2 /�v- A r�b �#Qmi bBt v2�`b QH/- r2 r2`2 b2`p2/ i?Bb /2HB+BQmb i`2�i BM i?2 ;�`/2M mM/2` i?2 +?2biMmi i`22X >mM;`BHv A b�i /QrM- #mi Kv #`Qi?2` r�b H�i2- r?B+? B``Bi�i2/ K2 +QMbB/2`�#HvX q?BH2 A r�b bBiiBM; i?2`2- kd k3 �R9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Rk rQ`FBM; mT Kv �M;2`- bQK2i?BM; 72HH /QrM 7`QK �#Qp2- Q#pBQmbHv ?2�p2M@b2MiX h?Bb bQK2i?BM; T`Qp2/ iQ #2 � DmB+v- ;`22M +�i2`TBHH�`X Ǵ>K-Ǵ A i?Qm;?i- Ǵ`2/ �M/ ;`22M HQQF r2HH iQ;2i?2`X G2i^b i`v i?Bb +QK#BM�iBQMXǴ aQQM i?2 2tT2`BK2Mi r�b K�/2 �M/ i?2 DmB+v- ;`22M +�i2`TBHH�` H�v �KQM/ i?2 bi`�r#2``B2bX LQr Kv +QMb+B2M+2 Km`Km`2/- Ǵh?Bb TH�i2 /Q2bM^i HQQF �i �HH M�im`�HXǴ kN jy �R8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Rj A T`QKTiHv `2bTQM/2/- Ǵ*�i2`TBHH�`b �`2 K2�i- �M/ � ;`QrBM; #Qv M22/b K2�iXǴ Ai M2p2` Q++m``2/ iQ K2 i?�i A r�b ;`QrBM;- iQQ �M/ KB;?i M22/ i?2 K2�i- bQ A ?�/ mMb2H}b?Hv T2`7Q`K2/ i?2 2tT2`BK2Mi BM Kv #`Qi?2`^b TH�i2X 6Q` ?QM2biv^b b�F2 A ?�p2 iQ bi�i2 i?�i A FM2r r2HH 2MQm;? A r�bM^i /QBM; i?2 `B;?i i?BM;X LQr A H2�`M2/ Kv H2bbQM- M�K2Hv ǴMQi iQ jR jk �Re (`B;?i T�;2 #H�MF) (H27i T�;2) R9 /Q mMiQ Qi?2`b �b A rQmH/ MQi ?�p2 i?2K /Q mMiQ K2-Ǵ #2+�mb2 A rQmH/ T`Q#�#Hv #2 i?2 QM2 7QQH2/ BM i?2 2M/X Jv KQi?2` QT2M2/ � rBM/Qr �M/ +�HH2/ /QrM iQ K2- Ǵ"BHHv /Q2b MQi 722H r2HH �M/ vQm K�v ?�p2 �HH ?Bb bi`�r#2``B2bX q2 bQK2iBK2b `2K2K#2` i?BM;b r?B+? /Q MQi b22K bQ BKTQ`i�MiX A `2K2K#2` 7QHHQrBM; BM+B/2Mi #2+�mb2 A i?Qm;?i i?�i A ?�/ jj j9 �Rd (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) R8 #22M i`2�i2/ mM7�B`HvX h?Bb 2t+BiBM; 2p2Mi Q++m`2/ r?2M A r�b �#Qmi b2p2M v2�`b QH/X PM2 MB;?i A rQF2 mT BM +QH/ br2�i- �M/ ?2�`/ � MQBb2 bm+? �b- A i?Qm;?i- +QmH/ QMHv #2 K�/2 #v � ;?QbiX A HBbi2M2/- mM/2` +Qp2`- iQ i?2 r�BHBM; �M/ b+`22+?BM;X h?2M A r?BbT2`2/ iQ Kvb2H7- Ǵ.Q bQK2i?BM;- [@[@[mB+F- Q` Bi rBHH F@F@FBHH mb �HHXǴ 6BM�HHv- A `2bQHp2/ j8 je �R3 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Re iQ #2 � ?2`QBM2 �M/- �`KBM; Kvb2H7 rBi? � TB2+2 Q7 +�`/#Q�`/- +`�rH2/ �M/ Q7 #2/X Ǵh?2 +?2biMmi i`22 ?�b �`Kb- �M/ Bi r�Mib iQ TmHH K2 /QrM-Ǵ A i?Qm;?i- b?Bp2`BM;X u2b- i?2 i`22 /B/ HQQF HBF2 � ;?Qbi5 q?�i +QmH/ i?Bb r�BHBM; #2\ A #2+�K2 bQ i2``B}2/ i?�i A `�M �;�BMbi bQK2i?BM;X .QrM 72HH �M BMF r2HH- K�FBM; � rQ`b2 MQBb2 i?�M �Mv ;?Qbi jd j3 �RN (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) Rd ?�/ 2p2` K�/2X AM +�K2 Kv KQi?2`- r?2`2mTQM A K�/2 �M 2p2M rQ`b2 MQBb2 �b � bQmM/ bT�MFBM; r�b #2BM; �/KBMBbi2`2/X "2+�mb2 A +QmH/ ;2i M2Bi?2` bvKT�i?v MQ` mM/2`bi�M/BM; 7`QK Kv T�`2Mib- A iQH/ Kv M2B;?#Q` �#Qmi i?2 Kvbi2`vX a?2 `2K�`F2/ +�bm�HHv- ǴaQ i?�i bi`�v +�i ?�b #22M };?iBM; rBi? � /Q; �;�BM- 2?\Ǵ jN 9y �ky (H27i T�;2 #H�MF (`B;?i T�;2) R3 q2HH- i?�i^b �HH A `2K2K#2`- bQ A^HH ;Q QM iQ � KQ`2 BMi2`2biBM; +?�Ti2`X h?Bb +?�Ti2` ?�b #22M �#Qmi i?2 i?BM;b mbm�HHv 7QmM/ BM +?BH/?QQ/- HBF2 /QHHb- ;?Qbib�M/ � +?2bMmi i`22X h?2 M2ti +?�Ti2` rBHH #2 �#Qmi 7�` /Bz2`2Mi i?BM;bX 9R 9k �kR (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) RN AAAX LQ *�HK "27Q`2 i?2 aiQ`KX Ǵq?�i rQmH/ vQm b�v B7 A r2Mi �r�v 7Q` � b?Q`i iBK2\Ǵ Jv 7�i?2` HQQF2/ bQ b2`BQmb �b ?2 b�B/ i?Bb i?�i A #2+�K2 7`B;?i2M2/X Ai r�b BM RNj3 �M/ A ?�/ ?2�`/ p2`v Km+? �#Qmi � K�M M�K2/ >BiH2` r?Q K�/2 HQM; bT22+?2b BM � HQm/ pQB+2�#Qmi r?B+? ;`QrM@mTb ;Qi p2`v 2tBi2/X A FM2r i?�i i?Bb K�M ?�/ bQK2i?BM; iQ /Q rBi? Kv 7�i?2`^b H2�pBM; 9j 99 �kk (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ky mbX Cmbi ?Qr ;`2�i Kv TQHBiB+�H FMQrH2/;2 r�b �i i?�i iBK2 A /QM^i `2K2K#2` MQrX q2HH- iQ K�F2 � HQM; �M/ b�/ biQ`v b?Q`i- Kv 7�i?2`^b i`mMFb r2`2 T�+F2/ �M/ QM2 MB;?i ?2 H27iX q2 i?Qm;? r2 rQmH/ b22 ?BK �;�BM BM �#Qmi 7Qm` r22Fb- #mi �K2`B+� r�b 7�` �r�v- Km+? 7m`i?2` i?�M r2 FM2rX AM S�`Bb �M BMbB;MB}+�Mi :2`K�M Q{+B�H ?�/ #22M 98 9e �kj (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) kR FBHH2/ #v � ?�H7@bi�`p2/ C2rX h?Bb ;�p2 i?2 L�xBb � HQM; r�Bi2/ 7Q` 2t+mb2 �M/ bQQM i?2 2tTHQbBQM +�K2X PM i?2 KQ`MBM; Q7 LQp2K#2` Ry- RNj3- A �``Bp2/ �i i?2 ;�i2 Q7 Kv b+?QQH- � rQM/2`7mH C2rBb? T`Bp�i2 b+?QQHX h?2`2 r�b MQi i?2 mbm�H +`Qr/- #mi QMHv � 72r TmTBHb- bQK2 Q7 i?2K +`vBM;X Pm` T`BM+BT�H +�HH2/ �M �bb2K#Hv- #mi ?2 +QmH/M^i b�v p2`v Km+?- #2+�mb2 ?2 r�b 9d 93 �k9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) kk ?�H7 +`vBM; ?BKb2H7X >2 Dmbi iQH/ mb iQ ;Q ?QK2 �M/ F22T Qz i?2 bi`22iX 6`QK i?2 ;B`Hb r?Q ?�/ rBiM2bb2/ Bi- A ?2�`/ ?Qr C2rBb? biQ`2b ?�/ #22M bK�b?2/ C2rBb? K2M /`�;;2/ iQ +QM+2Mi`�iBQM +�KTb- Qm` bvM�;Q;m2b r2`2 #m`MBM;X 6Q` bQK2 `2�bQM A 72Hi �M/ K�Mv Qi?2`b /B/ �HbQ- HBF2 ;2iiBM; mT �M/ bBM;BM; Qm` �Mi?2K>�iBFp�? r?B+? K2�Mb ?QT2X q2 +QmH/M^i- i?Qm;?- 9N 8y �k8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) kj #2+�mb2 r2 r2`2 BM L�xB :2`K�MvX h?2M- Kv KQi?2` bQH/ Qm` ?Qmb2X A r�b bQ #mbv T�+FBM;- +�``vBM;- �M/ `mMMBM; 2``�M/b i?�i A ?�/ MQ iBK2 iQ #2 b�/X Jv T�`2Mib ?�/ HBp2/ BM i?Bb ?Qmb2 7Q` b2p2Mi22M v2�`b- �M/ A- �HbQ- ?�/ M2p2` HBp2/ �Mvr?2`2 2Hb2X 8R 8k �ke (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) k9 AoX AM L�xB :2`K�Mv @ �M/ � q�` _�;BM;X PM a2Ti2K#2` R- RNjN- 2p2`vi?BM; Bb BM � im`KQBHX q�` Bb /2+H�`2/- >BiH2` Bb BM SQH�M/- �M/ B7 bQK2i?BM; ;Q2b r`QM;- C2rb rBHH ?�p2 iQ T�v �b mbm�HX Pm` i2�+?2`b �`2 ?�pBM; � ?�`/ iBK2- #2+�mb2 i?2v K�v MQi i2�+? �M/ b�v �b i?2v r�Mi iQX h?2v ?�/ #2bi MQi 2p2M i?BMF- #2+�mb2 QM2 Bb Bb BM /�M;2` Q7 i�HFBM; B7 8j 89 �kd (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) k8 QM2 /Q2bX h?2 i2�+?2`b �HH ?�p2 i?2B` QrM +�`2b- �M/- b�/ iQ b�v- r2 i�F2 �/p�Mi�;2 Q7 i?�iX Pm` i2�+?2` Q7 ?BbiQ`v- +QKKQMHv +�HH2/ 1B72H hQr2`- #2+�mb2 Q7 ?Bb bBt 722i �M/ A /QM^i FMQr ?Qr K�Mv BM+?2b- Bb p2`v �#b2Mi KBM/2/X >2`2^b �M 2t�KTH2 Q7 ?Qr ?Bb +H�bb2b �`2 +QM/m+i2/X Ǵ.`X A@@@- K�v A H2�p2 i?2 `QQK\Ǵ ǴuQm K�v- #mi H2i mb ;2i QM rBi? i?2 H2bbQMX u2b- vQm K�v ;Q- iQQX PT2M vQm` #QQFb- 88 8e �k3 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) k8 ke �M/ MQ KQ`2 BMi2``mTiBQMbX A7 vQm Kmbi H2�p2 i?2 `QQK- Dmbi ;QXǴ aQ i?2 H2bbQM +�M +QMiBMm2b iBHH i?2 1B72H hQr2` HQQFb mTX >2 b�vb BM � bm`T`Bb2/ pQB+2- Ǵ*?BH/`2Mr?v �`2 bQ K�Mv Q7 vQm �#b2Mi\ h?Qb2 MQi T`2b2Mi rBHH TH2�b2 `2TQ`i iQ K2 iQKQ``QrX Ǵu2b- bB`-Ǵ `2bTQM/b i?2 bQ``v `2K�BM/2` Q7 i?2 +H�bb �M/ i?2 K�ii2` Bb /`QTT2/X h?2M i?2`2 Bb �TTQHHQ- +�HH2/ bQ #v 8d 83 �kN (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) kd i?2 bim/2Mib #2+�mb2 ?2 Bb MQi i?2 #2bi HQQFBM;X >2 ?�b � HBiiH2 `2/ #QQF BM r?B+? ?2 Tmib +QM/m+i K�`FbX PM2 /�v ?2 H27i i?Bb ?�i2/ HBiiH2 #QQF QM ?Bb /2bFX q?2M ?2 +�K2 #�+F iQ ;2i Bi- i?Bb r�b r?�i ?2 7QmM/, ǴPM2 +QM/m+i K�`F 7Q` .`X "@@@- r?Q KBb#2?�p2b BM b?+QQH �M/ /Bbim`#b i?2 TmTBHb BM +H�bbXǴ LQr i?Bb K�v bQmM/ p2`v mMFBM/- #mi r2 /B/ HQp2 Qm` i2�+?2`b- UKQbi Q7 i?2 8N ey �jy (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) k3 iBK2V �M/ i?2v HBF2/ mbX q2 ?�/ i�bi2b Q7 `2�H r�`- iQQ- �M/ KQ`2 i?�M r2 HBF2/X "2`HBM ;Qi � ;QQ/ TH�bi2`BM; 2p2`v bQ Q7i2MX h?Bb Bb ?Qr Bi ?�TT2MbX AM i?2 KB//H2 Q7 i?2 MB;?i � bB`2M b+`2�KbX � bB`2M- r?2M Bi b�vb- Ǵh?Bb Bb i?2 `2�H i?BM;Ǵ- +�M #2 p2`v �MMQvBM;X LQ- �MMQvBM; BbM^i i?2 `B;?i rQ`/X h?2`2 Bb MQ rQ`/ iQ /2b+`B#2 i?�i 722HBM;- �b Bi ;Q2b eR ek �jR (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) kN /QrM i?2 #�+F �M/ HQ/;2b BM i?2 biQK�+?- +�mbBM; T2+mHB�` b2Mb�iBQMbX q2HHH2i^b ;2i #�+F iQ i?2 KB//H2 Q7 i?2 MB;?iX �b A DmKT Qmi Q7 #2/ Bi Bb B+2 +QH/X Uh?Bb Bb BM i?2 rBMi2`X AM bmKK2` 2p2`vi?BM; Bb KQ`2 TH2�b�MiXV A mb2 bQK2 p2`v bi`QM; rQ`/b- UQ7 r?B+? i?2`2 �`2 K�Mv BM i?2 :2`K�M H�M;m�;2V MQi #2+�mb2 A �K BHH@K�MM2`2/- #mi iQ K�F2 Kvb2H7 722H i?�i A^K biBHH �HBp2X ej e9 �jk (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jy �HH Q7 � bm//2M � bi`�M;2 722HBM;- r?B+? K�Mv �B`@`�B/ p2i2`�Mb �+[mB`2- i2HHb mb i?�i bQK2i?BM; Bb BM i?2 �B`X Jv KQi?2` Bb ?m``vBM; mb BMiQ i?2 +2HH�` r?B+? b2`p2b �b �B`@`�B/ b?2Hi2`X Jv #`Qi?2` Bb QMHv ?QH/BM; ?Bb 2�`bc ?2 FMQrb r?�i Bb iQ +QK2X LQr r2 ?2�` � Tm``BM; MQBb2 �#Qp2 mb- bQmM/BM; ?�`KH2bb- #mi BM `2�HBiv i?2 2M;BM2b Q7 #QK#2`bX q2 +�M e8 ee �jj (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jR ?2�` i?�i i?2v �`2 1M;HBb?- �M/ r2 �`2 ?�TTv �M/ +QMi2M/X h?2 1M;HBb? �`2 iQ mb C2rb ;QQ/ 7`B2M/b- r?Q +QK2 iQ pBbBi mb- i?�MF :Q/- `2;mH�`HvX aQ r?�i B7 r2 HQb2 Qm` bH22TX h?2b2 �`2 Qm` i?Qm;?ib �b i?2v Ui?2 1M;HBb? #QK#2`bV +QK2 M2�`2`X LQr � b?Qi Bb ?2�`/X Ai bQmM/b ?QHHQr �M/ HBF2 � 7Q`2@#Q/BM; Q7 r?�i Bb iQ +QK2X h?�M ?2HH #`2�Fb HQQb2- �M/ vQm rBHH ?�p2 iQ BK�;BM2 ed e3 �j9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jk i?2 `2bi 7Q` vQm`b2H7X A +�M QMHv �bbm`2 vQm i?�i i?2 r�`@KQpB2b �`2 � #�/ BKBi�iBQM Q7 BiX h?Bb Bb i?2 iBK2 r?2M T2QTH2 #2;BM iQ b?m//2`- r?2M ?2�`ib #2�i rBH/Hv- �M/ r?2M i?2v- �i H�bi- T`�vX q2HH- 2p2`vi?BM; T�bb2b BM iBK2- �M/ �7i2` irQ ?Qm`b i?2 Ǵ�HH +H2�`Ǵ bQmM/bX aQK2iBK2b r2 �`2 +�HH2/ mT �;�BM ?�H7 �M ?Qm` H�i2`X h?Bb K�v ?�TT2M b2p2M eN dy �j8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jj iBK2b � r22F- #mi KQ`2 Q7i2M QMHv QM+2 Q` irB+2X PmibB/2 Bi Bb #Bii2` +QH/- i?2 ?Qmb2 Bb #�/Hv ?2�i2/- 7QQ/ `�iBQM2/X C2rBb? `�iBQM@ +QmTQMb ?�p2 � `2/ ǴCǴ QM i?2K bQ i?�i biQ`2F22T2`b rBHH i�F2 +�`2 iQ #2 2ti`� BKTQHBi2X C2rb K�v QMHv #mv BM biQ`2b #2ir22M i?2 9 �M/ 8 TXK- bQ i?�i i?2`2 rQM^i #2 �Mvi?BM; H27i r?2M i?2v +QK2X SQi�iQ2b- dR dk �je (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) j9 i?2 7QQ/ Q7 r?B+? i?2`2 Bb KQbi- �`2 7`Qx2M �M/ ?�p2 � br22i- /Bb;mbiBM; i�bi2X u2i Kv 7`B2M/b �M/ A �`2 ?�TTvX a+?QQH #2;BMb MQr �i Rk �XKX bQ r2 K�v bH22T BM i?2 KQ`MBM; bBM+2 r2 ?�p2M^i bH2Ti BM i?2 MB;?iX 1p2`vi?BM; Bb mMmbm�H- 2tBiBM;� M2r- �/p2Mim`QmbX q2 ?�p2 i?�i r?B+? r2 �Hr�vb /`2�K2/ Q7 @ ?�`/b?BT/�M;2`- �/p2Mim`2X u2i r2 dj d9 �jd (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) j8 �`2 MQi /vBM;c r2 �`2- BM 7�+i- QMHv /QBM; rBi? Qmi � 72r i?BM;bX q2 �`2 BM ;`2�i /�M;2`- v2i HBpBM; +QKT�`�iBp2Hv +QK7Q`i�#H2X q2 �`2 MQi �Hr�vb mM722HBM; �/p2Mim`2`b- i?Qm;?X q?2M biQM2b �`2 i?`QrM �7i2` mb r2 `2K2K#2` p2`v r2HH i?�i r2 �`2 C2rbX q2 FMQr i?�i i?2b2 i?BM;b �`2 ?�TT2MBM; iQ mb #2+�mb2 r2 �`2 C2rb- �M/ r2 �`2 T`Qm/ Q7 d8 de �j3 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) je BiX h?2M r2 i?BMF iQ Qm`b2Hp2b- Ǵq2 �`2 #2ii2` i?�M i?2 L�xBb- �M/ BM i?2 2M/ r2 rBHH #2 ?�TTB2` i?�M i?2v- �M/ i?2v rBHH ?�p2 iQ T�v 7Q` 2p2`vi?BM;XǴ q2- Kv #`Qi?2` �M/ A- ?�/ � p2`v ?�xv B/2� Q7 �K2`B+�X AM 7�+i- r2 ?�/ HBiiH2 iBK2 iQ i?BMF Q7 i?�i +QmMi`v- 7Q` 1m`QT2 r�b iQQ BMi2`2biBM;X u2i r2 rBb?2/ iQ ;Q i?2`2- bQ- Q7 +Qm`b2- r2 �HH dd d3 �jN (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jd ?�/ Qm` /`2�Kb- �M/ A rQM/2` r2i?2` Kv #`Qi?2`^b �M/ Kv KQi?2`^b +�K2 i`m2c KBM2 /B/M^iX Jv 7�i?2` BM �K2`B+�- Kv KQi?2` BM "2`HBM r2`2 rQ`FBM; ?�`/ iQ ;2i mb iQ �K2`B+� �M/ b�72ivX h?2v �++QKTHBb?2/ r?�i K�Mv T2QTH2 7�BH2/ iQ BMX 62r T2QTH2 +�M �TT`2+B�i2 r?�i � 72�i i?�i r�bX LQr #2;�M � T2`BQ/ Q7 ?�`/ rQ`F- T�+FBM;- ;2iiBM; dN 3y �9y (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) j3 T�T2`b 7`QK i?2 �K2`B+�M +QMbmH�i2- �M/ 7`QK i?2 :2`K�M Q{+B�HbX q2 ?�/ iQ HBbi 2p2`vi?BM; r2 r�Mi2/ iQ i�F2 QmiX hQQi?#`mb?2b- T�MiB2b- �M/ `�;b- �HH i?2b2 r2`2 QM i?2 HBbiX L�xBb r2`2 �7`�B/ i?�i r2 rQmH/ i�F2 bQK2i?BM; p�Hm�#H2 rBi? mbX u2i i?2b2 i?BM;b #2HQM;2/ iQ mbX u2i 1p2M r?BH2 A �K r`BiBM; i?Bb- A �K HBbi2MBM; iQ i?2 6Qm`i? SB�MQ 3R 3k �9R (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) jN (*QM+2`iQ) #v "22i?Qp2MX Ai Bb TH�v2/ #v i?2 7�KQmb a+?M�#2HX q2 ?�/ i?2 +QM+2`iQ QM `2+Q`/b- #mi A r2 r2`2 7Q`+2/ iQ H2�p2 Bi BM "2`HBMX "22i?Qp2M Bb � :2`K�M- bQ Bb a+?M�#2H- v2i r2`2 Bb �HH i?�i QH/ :2`K�M +mHim`2\ AM i?2 M2ti +?�Ti2` A �K ;QBM; iQ H2�p2 :2`K�MvX "27Q`2 A /Q- A r�Mi iQ b�v i?Bb, A ?QT2 i?�i bQK2/�v :2`K�Mv rBHH #2 �;�BM � T2�+27mH +QmMi`v- K�/2 7�KQmb #v bm+? 3j 39 �9k (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9y M�K2b �b "22i?Qp2M- "�+?- �M/ "`�?Kb- �M/ MQi BM7�KQmb #v � ?2`/ Q7 mM+mH@ im`2/- #`mi�H +�iiH2- r?Q i?BMF i?2v +�M BKT`Qp2 QM i?2 K�bi2`bX A rBb? i?Bb #2+�mb2 A �K #Q`M BM :2`K�Mv- �M/ A +�M^i ?2HT HQpBM; i?2 +QmMi`v BM r?B+? A �K #Q`M- +�M A\ 38 3e �9j (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9R oX �+`Qbb i?2 P+2�MX �T`BH- RN9R @ Ai Bb 7Qm` Q^+HQ+F BM i?2 KQ`MBM;c /�rM Bb Dmbi #`2�FBM; Qp2` "2`HBMX � i�tB +�#- i?2 QrM2` Q7 r?B+? ?�b ?�/ iQ #2 #`B#2/- #2+�mb2 ?2 Bb MQi �HHQr2/ iQ /`Bp2 C2rb- Bb i�FBM; mb i?`Qm;? "2`HBMX >Qr #2�miB7mH i?2 +Biv Bb5 q2 HQQF r2HH- #2+�mb2 Bi K�v #2 7Q` i?2 H�bi iBK2X Ai Bb MQi �b 2�bv �b Bi 3d 33 �99 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9k rQmH/ b22K- iQ H2�p2 i?Bb +Biv r?B+? b22Kb �i }`bi ;H�M+2 bQ Km+? HBF2 � rQ`F Q7 ;`2�i �`iBbib- #mi r?B+? Bb bQ 7mHH Q7 };?i �M/ KBb2`vX � ;`2�i K�Mv T2QTH2MQi �b Hm+Fv �b r2- �`2 biBHH i?2`2- rBi? M2p2` � +?�M+2 iQ ;2i QmiX �KQM; i?2K Bb Kv �mMi- r?QK r2 rBHH ?�p2 iQ H2�p2 iQ/�vX >Qr Km+? b?2 ?�b ?2HT2/ mb /m`BM; i?2 H�bi ?�`/ 3N Ny �98 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9j v2�`b5 LQr r2 �``Bp2 �i "2`HBM^b ;`2�i `�BH`Q�/ bi�iBQM- U�M?�Hi2` "�?M?Q7V r?B+? ?�b T`2pBQmbHv #22M #QK#2/X 6`QK i?Bb bi�iBQM r2 r2Mi iQ bQ K�Mv TH�+2bi?2 LQ`i? a2�- i?2 "�HiB+ a2�- i?2 "H�+F 6Q`2biX h?Bb iBK2 2p2`vi?BM; rBHH #2 /Bz2`2MiX h?2 "�?M?Q7 Bb �b #mbv �b 2p2`- #mi MQi rBi? T2�+27mH +BpBHB�Mb- #mi rBi? mMB7Q`K2/- NR Nk �9e (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 99 i2M v2�` QH/ #Qvb- bBM;BM; `QmbBM; bQM;b �#Qmi i?2B` 6Ƀ?`2`X Ai^b Dmbi i?2 `B;?i i?BM; 7Q` T`2p2MiBM; mb 7`QK 722HBM; i?2 H2�bi #Bi b�/ �#Qmi H2�pBM;X 6Q` � 7�`2@ r2HH- i?2 :2`K�M Ǵ�mi?Q`BiB2b-Ǵ :2bi�TQ K2M- Q`/2` mb �`QmM/X q?�i /Q r2` +�`2- r2^`2 ;2iiBM; Qmi Q7 ?2`2X h?2M r2- �M/ 7Qm` Nj N9 �9d (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 98 ?�M/#�;b- Qm` bQH2 TQbb2bbBQMb �i i?Bb KQK2Mi- �`2 /2TQbBi2/ BM i?2 +`Qr/2/ i`�BM- �M/ i?2 /QQ`b �`2 HQ+F2/ QmibB/2X LQr i?2 i`�BM KQp2bX q2 HQQF �i 2�+? Qi?2`X Ai Bb ?�TT2MBM;5 h?2 iBK2 ?�b +QK2 �i H�bi5 A +�M^i 2tTH�BM Kv 722HBM;b iQ Kvb2H7 Dmbi i?2M MQrX ǴA^K ;QBM; iQ b22 Kv 7�i?2` N8 Ne �93 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9e �;�BM- �7i2` i?`22 v2�`bX P?- ?Qr r2 A ?�p2 rBb?2/ 7Q` i?Bb iBK2 iQ +QK25Ǵ h?2b2 �`2 Kv i?Qm;?ib 7Q` QM2 KBMmi2X h?2M- ǴA �K H2�pBM; i?2 +QmMi`v r?B+? L�xBb ?�p2 7Q`+2/ K2 iQ ?�i2- #mi r?B+? A rQmH/ Km+? `�i?2` HQp2-Ǵ ~�b?2b i?`Qm;? Kv KBM/X Ǵq?�i rBHH �K2`B+� #2 HBF2\Ǵ A �bF Kvb2H7X h?2M i?2 B/2� Q7 K2 b22BM; Kv Nd N3 �9N (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9d 7�i?2` �;�BM #2+QK2b bQ ;`2�i �M/ rQM/2`7mH i?�i A �K Dmbi ?�TTv �M/ MQi?BM; 2Hb2X "v MQr r2 �`2 Qmi Q7 i?2 +BivX q2 ;2i �+[m�BMi2/ rBi? i?2 Qi?2` T�bb2M;2`b BM Qm` +QKT�`iK2MiX � r?QH2- HQM; /�v T�bb2bX q2 ?�p2 b22M i?2 7Q`2bibKQmMi�BMb- `Bp2`b- �M/ K2�/Qrb Q7 r2bi2`M :2`K�MvX "2�miB7mH �b i?2 pB2r Bbr2 ;2i p2`v NN Ryy �8y (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 93 iB`2/X PM+2 BM � r?BH2 r2 b22 � +�biH2X q2 MQr +QK2 M2�` i?2 6`2M+? #Q`/2`X h?2M- iQ Qm` /Bb�TTQBMiK2Mi- r2 �`2 biQTT2/X q2 Kmbi bT2M/ i?2 MB;?i rBi?BM :2`K�Mv- @ Qm` H�bi MB;?iX .QQ`b �`2 QTT2M2/ 7Q` � [m�`i2` Q7 �M ?Qm`- bQ i?�i r2 K�v bi`2i+? Qm` H2;bX h?2M i?2v �`2 HQ+F2/- �M/ :2`K�M bQH/B2`b rBi? ;mMb K�`+? mT �M/ RyR Ryk �8R (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 9N /QrM QmibB/2X h?2v �`2 �7`�B/ Q7 mb- r?B+? r2 +QMbB/2` �b � +QKTHBK2MiX .m`BM; i?2 MB;?i r2 bBi BM Qm` TH�+2bc bH22TBM; Bb �HKQbi BKTQbbB#H2 BM �b HBiiH2 bT�+2 �b r2 ?�p2X 6m`i?2`KQ`2 r2 �`2 �Hr�vb /Bbim`#2/ #v :2bi�TQ K2M r?Q r�Mi bQK2i?BM; Q` Qi?2`- KQbiHv iQ #Qi?2` mbX JQ`MBM; +QK2b �i H�bi- �M/ MQr Bb � i?2 ;`2�i KQK2MiX Ryj Ry9 �8k (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8y Pm` T�iB2M+2 Bb i`B2/- i?Qm;?- r?BH2 mMB7Q`K2/ K2M +?2+F Qm` #�;;�;2X h?2v r�Mi Qm` KQM2v- iQQ- #mi `�i?2` i?�M ;Bp2 Bi iQ i?2K- r2 i?`Qr Bi Qmi Q7 i?2 rBM/QrX h?2v �HbQ i�F2 Kv 7�i?2`^b �M/ Kv KQi?2`^b /2+Q`�iBQMb 7`QK i?2 H�bi r�`X UJv 7�i?2` r�b � /Q+iQ`- Kv KQi?2` � _2/ *`Qbb Lm`b2XV LQ QM2 +�`2b#2+�mb2 i?2 Ry8 Rye �8j (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8R i`�BM Bb KQpBM; MQrX q2 �`2 +`QbbBM; i?2 :2`K�M #Q`/2`c MQr r2 �`2 BM 6`�M+25 aQQM r2 �`2 �;�BM `2KBM/2/ Q7 r�`X q2 T�bb i?`Qm;? i?2 7�KQmb J�;BM�H HBM2X 1p2`vi?BM; Bb BM `mBMb- ?Qmb2b rBi?Qmi `QQ7b- i`22b rBi?Qmi H2�p2b- }2H/b rBi?Qmi +`QTb- 6`�M+2 rBi?Qmi ?2`2 ;`2�i2bi [m�HBiv- #2�mivX �M/ i?2M @ S�`BbX �;�BM- i?Qm;? MQi?BM; Bb Q` b22K2b /2bi`Qv2/- Ryd Ry3 �89 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8k i?2`2 Bb i?�i bTB`Bi Q7 `mBM �#Qmi BiX h?2 :�`2 /m LQ`/ Bb 7mHH Q7 :2`K�M bQH/B2`bX A �K i?BMFBM; Q7 i?2 J�`b2BHH�Bb2Q7 6`�M+2^b ;`2�i ?BbiQ`vX >Qr ?mKBH�iBM; Bi Kmbi #2 7Q` i?2b2 6`2M+?- r?Qb2 T`BM+BT�H2b �`2 GB#2`iv- 1[m�HBiv- 6`�i2`MBiv- iQ #2 mM/2` i?2 L�xB `mH2X aQQM >2`2 � 6`2M+? RyN RRy �88 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8j TQ`i2` 7QmM/ Qmi i?�i Kv KQi?2` bTQF2 6`2M+?X Ǵ"2�m+QmT /2b #QM#QMb ¨ "2`HBM\Ǵ UJ�Mv +�M/B2b BM "2`HBM\V ?2 �bF2/ TQBMiBM; mTr�`/bX Jv KQi?2` mM/2`biQQ/ r?�i ?2 K2�Mi- M�K2Hv i?2 #QK#BM;bX �M/ >2 r�b Qp2`DQv2/ r?2M b?2 �Mbr2`2/ BM i?2 �{`K�iBp2X h?2 p2`v BMi2`2biBM; �M/ #2�miB7mH i`BT i?`Qm;? 6`�M+2 RRR RRk �8e (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 89 Bb +QKBM; iQ �M 2M/ �b r2 �TT`Q�+? i?2 aT�MBb? #Q`/2`X q2 ?�p2 MQi bH2Ti 7Q` KQ`2 i?�M }p2 /�vbX "BHHv- r?Q Bb �7i2` �HH- QMHv MBM2 v2�`b QH/- Bb MQi bQ r2HHX q2 rQmH/ �HH HQp2 iQ ?�p2 � r�`K K2�H- #mi r?2M r2 2Mi2` aT�BM- r2 biQT 722HBM; bQ``v 7Q` Qm`b2Hp2bX AMbB/2 aT�BM i?2 i`�BM biQTb ?�HibX RRj RR9 �8d (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 88 _B;?i �r�v r2 �`2 bm``QmM/2/ #v i?BM- `�;;2/ aT�MB�`/bX h?2v rBHH i`�/2 Qm` }p2 /�v QH/ #`2�/ 7Q` }p2 Q`�M;2bX q2 ?�p2M^i b22M }p2 Q`�M;2b iQ;2i?2` 7Q` � HQM; iBK2- #mi r2 722H bQ``v 7Q` i?2b2 T2QTH2 r?Q /QM^i 2p2M ?�p2 #`2�/X AM a�M a2#�biB�M- � 7�KQmb `2bQ`i (TH�+2)- r2 ;2i Qz i?2 i`�BMX q2 �`2 ;QBM; iQ bH22T RR8 RRe �83 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8e BM � `2�H #2/b5 q2 �`2 Dmbi rB/2 2MQm;? �r�F2 iQ b22 i?2 `mBMb Q7 i?2 +BpBH r�`�M/ � `�;;2/- /B`iv TQbi2` Q7 6`�M+Q- bvK#QHB+ Q7 i?2 +QmMi`v Bib2H7X AM i?2 ?Qi2H r2 ;Q iQ bH22T �M/ bH22T 7Q` � r?QH2 /�v- rBi?Qmi r�FBM; mTX h?2 7QQ/ Bb #�/2p2M i?Qm;? r2 �`2 BM i?2 #2bi ?Qi2H BM iQrMX h?2`2 Bb TH2Miv Q7 T2TT2`- TH2Miv Q7 b�Hi- �M/ TH2Miv Q7 RRd RR3 �8N (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8d D�KX h?�i^b �HHX A^HH M2p2` 7Q`;2i i?2 bB;?i Q7 � bi�`pBM; /Q; r?QK r2 ;�p2 bQK2 +?22b2X h?2 T2�bb�Mib r2`2 bi�M/BM; �`QmM/ mb- iQ T`Qm/ iQ �bF mb 7Q` r?�i HBiiH2 r2 ?�/- Q` iQ i�F2 Bi 7`QK i?2 /Q;X q2HH- bQQM r2 �`2 Qmi Q7 aT�BM- iQQ- �M/ BM SQ`im;�H- 1m`QT2^b H�M/ Q7 TH2MivX q2 ;2i bQK2i?BM; iQ 2�iX GBb#QM Bb bmTTQb2/ RRN Rky �ey (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 83 iQ #2 � #2�miB7mH +BivX A /BbHBF2/ Bi KQ`2 i?�M �Mv Qi?2`X _B+? Bb BM i?2 KB/bi Q7 TQQ`- rBi?Qmi MQiB+BM; Bi- Q` r�MiBM; iQ ?2HTX 6Q` 2p2`v ?2�Hi?v K�M i?2`2 b22K iQ #2 irQ +`BTTH2bX LQ QM2 b22Kb iQ #2 BM i?2 +Biv #2+�mb2 ?2 r�Mib iQ #2#mi QMHv #2+�mb2 ?2 r�Mib iQ ;Q bQK2r?2`2 2Hb2X AM i?2 i?`22 r22Fb A r�b ?2`2 RkR Rkk �eR (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) 8N A H2�`Mi �HH �#Qmi GBb#QM #v ;2iiBM; HQbi 2p2`v /�vX LQr A FMQr i?2 +Biv #v ?2�`ibi�`iBM; rBi? i?2 K�D2biB+ KQMmK2Mib- /QrM iQ `2;BK2Mib Q7 HB+2 �M/ #2/@#m;bX q2 ?�/ #22M bQ rQ``B2b �#Qmi ;2iiBM; TH�+2b QM i?2 b?BTX q2 ;Qi TH�+2b iB+F2ib �i H�bi- i?Qm;?- r?2M i?Qmb�M/b Q7 Qi?2`b r2`2 biBHH r�BiBM;- /m2 iQ Kv KQi?2`^b Rkj Rk9 �ek (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ey +Qm`�;2 �M/ ?�`/ rQ`FX qBi?Qmi ?2` r2 rQmH/ biBHH #2 BM :2`K�Mv- Q` K�v#2 MQi 2p2M i?�iX h?2M- QM2 /�v- A 7QmM/ Kvb2H7 QM i?2 bi2�K2` ǴJQmxBM?Q-Ǵ i`vBM; iQ r�F2 mT 7`QK r?�i A r�b �7`�B/ r�b � /`2�KX q?2M A r�b i?`Qm;? rBi? (`mb?BM;) 7Q` � #mMF- biQrBM; �r�v Qm` i`mMFb- �M/ �`;mBM; Qp2` bQK2 mMBKTQ`i�Mi i?BM;- A Rk8 Rke �ej (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) eR r2Mi mT iQ i?2 `�BHBM;X �b A HQQF2/ /QrM QM i?2 TB2` A /`2�K2/ Q7 �K2`B+�- Q7 Kv 7�i?2`- Q7 1m`QT2 �b Bi r�bX q?v r�b A #Q`M BM i?Bb 2tBiBM; iBK2\ q?v /B/ :Q/ H2i K2 HBp2 �M/ Qi?2`b /B2\ q?v r�b i?2`2 �Hr�vb i`Qm#H2 BM :2`K�Mv\ h?2 #HQrBM; Q7 i?2 b?BT^b bB`2M BMi2`mTi2/ K2X LQr i?2 b?BT r�b mM/2` r�vc A r�b HQQFBM; Rkd Rk3 �e9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ek QM 1m`QT2- K�v#2 7Q` i?2 H�bi iBK2X 6mMMv i?BM; �#Qmi i?Bb 1m`QT2c Bi^b HBF2 � T`Q#H2K +?BH/- �Hr�vb ;2iiBM; BMiQ i`Qm#H2- v2i �MvQM2 r?Q FMQr Bi- HQp2b BiX :QQ/ #v2- :2`K�Mvc ;QQ/ Hm+F iQ �HH i?Qb2 r?Q �`2 MQi �b Hm+Fv �b Ac �K2`B+�?2`2 r2 +QK25 A7 vQm HBF2 +H2�MHBM2bb �M/ +QK7Q`i- vQm ?�/ RkN Rjy �e8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ej #2ii2` bFBT i?2 M2ti T�`�;`�T?bX h?2v �`2 ;QBM; iQ H�+F BM +QMbB/2`�iBQM 7Q` vQmX h?2 2M+v+HQT2/B� b�vb i?�i �MMib HBp2 BM i`22@i`mMFb Q` BM b�M/@?BHHbX A FMQr #2ii2`X h?2v HBp2 BM 7QQ/- #2/b- +HQi?2b- �Mvr?2`2- �b HQM; �b i?2v �MMQv bQK2@ #Q/vX �i H2�bi i?Bb Bb i`m2 7Q` �M �M+B2Mi #�i?@im#- +�HH2/ � bi2�K2`- r?B+? Bb /2bB;M2/ iQ +�``v irQ@?mM/`2/ T2`bQMb- RjR Rjk �ee (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) e9 #mi Bb +�``vBM; MBM2 ?mM/`2/X u2b- i?�i r�b i?2 ǴJQmxBM?QXǴ Pm` K2Mm 7Q` amM/�v QM i?Bb #Q�i, *?B+F2M #QM2b- +QH/ #2�Mb- B+2/ TQi�iQ bQmT- #mi A 2MDQv Bi #2+�mb2 A^K MQi b2�bB+FX q2 HBp2 irQ ?mM/`2/ iQ;2i?2`- BM i?2 TH�+2 mM/2` /2+F r?2`2 +�iiH2 Q` i`mMFb �`2 mbm�HHv biQr2/ �r�vX h?2 bi�B`b H2�/BM; /QrM i?2`2 �`2 BKTQbbB#H2 QM biQ`Kv /�vbX h?2 T2QTH2 r?Q �`2 b2�bB+F Rjj Rj9 �ed (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) e8 /QM^i �// iQ i?2 b�MBi�`v +QM/BiBQMb Q7 i?2 TB;@bivX >2`2 �HbQ A K22i i?2 }`bi M2;`Q A ?�p2 2p2` b22Mc � `2�H QM2- 7`QK �7`B+�X >2 Bb � p2`v ?�M/bQK2 72HHQr- #mi ?2 Bb BM i?2 ?�#Bi Q7 ;2iiBM; biQK�+?@�+?2b �`QmM/ +H2�MBM;@iBK2- r?B+? +�M QMHv #2 +m`2/ rBi? Q`�M;2bX >Bb M�K2 Bb (S2/`Q)X �HbQ QM i?2 b?BT �`2 b2p2`�H �K2`B+�M KBbbBQM�`B2b r?Q r2`2 Rj8 Rje �e3 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ee TB+F2/ mT 7`QK � iQ`T2/Q2/ b?BTX h?2v i2�+? mb i?2 ai�` aT�M;H2/ "�MM2` �M/ �HH �#Qmi MB+F2Hb- /BK2b- [m�`i2`b- �M/ /QHH�`bX h?2v �HbQ i`v iQ +QMp2`i mb- #mi r2 �`2 T2`72+iHv +QMi2M/ �b C2rbX �HH T2iiv /Bb+QK7Q`ib �`2 7Q`;QiiQM r?2M r2 bi�M/ �i BM i?2 #Qr Q7 i?2 b?BT iQ r�i+? i?2 bmM@b2i Q` r?2M r2 bBi iQ;2i?2` �M/ bBM;X h?2`2 �`2 Bb � i`�MbTQ`i Q7 +?BH/`2M Rjd Rj3 �eN (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) ed 7`QK 6`�M+2- �M/ r2 FMQr i?2 b�K2 #2HQp2/ >2#`2r bQM;b �b i?2vX h?2`2 Bb �HbQ � /�M+2 i2�+?2` r?Q Q`;�MBx2b ;vKM�biB+bX q2 �`2 MQr QM i?2 #Q�i 7Q` ir2Hp2 /�vbX hQKQ``Qr r2 b?�HH #2 BM �K2`BF�X AM i?2 MB;?i- 2p2`v 72r ?Qm`b- bQK2QM2 r�F2b mT i?BMFBM; i?�i r2 �`2 i?2`2X �i i?`22 Q^+HQ+F r2 +�MMQi bi�M/ Bi �MvKQ`2X q2 ;2i mT �M/ ?m//H2 RjN R9y �dy (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) e3 iQ;2i?2` BM i?2 #Qr- r�BiBM; 7Q` /�rMX �M/ i?2M- i?2`2 Bb i?2 bmM- `BbBM; mT #2?BM/ � bBM;H2 bFvb+`�T2`- K�FBM; Bi HQQF HBF2 � /`2�KX �K2`B+� Bb ;BpBM; mb � ;HQ`BQmb r2HH+QK2X 1p2`i?BM; Bb [mBi2- HBF2 � +?m`+?- �M/ �b r2 ;HB/2 #v r2 b22 i?2 ai�im2 Q7 GB#2`iv 7`QK 7�`- 7�` �r�vX P? b�v- +�M vQm b22- #v i?2 /�rM^b 2�`Hv HB;?i@@\ q2 �`2 i?2`2- �i H�bi- BM �K2`B+�X R9R R9k �dR (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) eN oAX �K2`B+�X 6`QK i?2 /�v QM r?B+? r2 `�M /QrM i?2 ;�M;@TH�MF iQ K22i Kv 7�i?2` iQ MQr irQ �M/ � ?�H7 v2�`b ?�p2 ;QM2 #vX A b?�HH T`Q#�#Hv M2p2` FMQr �HH Q7 �K2`B+�Bi Bb iQ ;`2�i 7Q` i?�i- #mi A ?�p2 #2+QK2 �+[m�BMi2/ rBi? Kv M2B;?#Q`?QQ/X Jv /`2�K Q7 �K2`B+� r�b Q7 i�HH bi22H bi`m+im`2b- bmT2` KQ/2`M ?Qmb2b- �M/ R9j R99 �dk (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) dy �M/ K�;B+�H /2pB+2bX P7 +Qm`b2- A r�b /Bb�TTQBMi2/ i?2`2- #mi BMbi2�/ A /Bb+Qp@ 2`2/ bQK2i?BM; ;`2�i2` �M/ #2ii2`- �K2`B+�^b ?BbiQ`vX Ai^b i?2 biQ`v Q7 � +QmMi`v ;QBM; mTr�`/b- MQi /QrM- �M/ �Hr�vb };?iBM; 7Q` ;`2�i Bi^b B/2�HbX h?�i r?B+? A HBF2 #2bi ?2`2- �M/ rQ`F ?�`/2bi 7Q`- Bb b+?QQHX PM2 Q7 Kv ?�TTB2bi /�vb r�b ;`�/m�iBQM /�v r?2M A rQM R98 R9e �dj (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) dR SXaX ReN^b J2/�H Q7 a+?QH�`b?BT 7Q` i?2 ?B;?2bi K�`Fb BM i?2 ;`�/2X A ?�p2 ?�/ BMi2`2biBM; 2tT2`B2M+2b BM �K2`B+�- #mi i?2v rQmH/ MQi #2 BKTQ`i�Mi iQ i?2 `2�/2` bQ A rBHH b?�HH +HQb2 ?2`2 i?2 biQ`v Q7 Kv HB72- Dmbi QM2 �KQM; �KQM; K�MvX A ?QT2 vQm ?�p2 2MDQv2/ `2�/BM; �#Qmi Bi �b Km+? �b A 2MDQv2/ HBpBM; BiX A i?�MF :Q/ i?�i A �K �HBp2 iQ i2HH �#Qmi Kvb2H7 HB72- �M/ A T`�v i?�i Kv +QK`�/2b Qp2` i?2`2 #2 Dmbi �b 7Q`imM�i2X R9d R93 �d9 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) dk oAAX GQQFBM; AMiQ i?2 *`vbi�H "�HHX h?2 7mim`2 Bb � ?�`/ i?BM; iQ HQQF BMiQX A r�Mi QM2 i?BM; iQ/�v �M/ �MQi?2` iQKQ``Qr- �M/ A T`Q#�#Hv rQM^i ;2i 2Bi?2`X A^HH i`v �Mvr�vX A^/ HBF2 iQ b22 1m`QT2 �;�BM- i?Bb iBK2 mM/2` /Bz2`2Mi +B`+mKbi�M+2bX A r�Mi iQ b22 S�`Bb- �M/ K�v#2 "2`HBM- �M/ �HbQ i?2 L2r 1tT2`BK2Mi BM R9N R8y �d8 (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) dj _mbbB�- iQ b22 r2i?2` Bi Bb `2�HHv �b ;`2�i �b Bi b22KbX �i T`2b2Mi A r�Mi iQ bim/v K2/B+BM2 HBF2 Kv 7�i?2`- � p2`v QH/ �K#BiBQMX h?2`2 �`2 � ;`2�i K�Mv Qi?2` i?BM;b i?�i A �K HQp2 BMi2`2bi2/ BM- bm+? �b KmbB+- ?BbiQ`v- �M/ �`iX A ?�p2 /QM2 bQK2 +H�v KQ/2HBM;- �M/ A ?QT2 iQ /Q �M/ H2�`M KQ`2X LQr A �K i`vBM; iQ H2�`M � #Bi �#Qmi 2p2`vi?BM;- bQ i?�i A rBHH FMQr i?2 QM2 i?BM; R8R R8k �de (H27i T�;2 #H�MF) (`B;?i T�;2) d9 r?B+? A +�M /Q #2bi- �M/ /Q i?�i iQ i?2 #2bi Q7 Kv �#BHBivX Jv ;`2�i2bi A +QM+Hm/2 rBi? i?2 rBb? Bb i?�i r?2`2p2` A K�v #2 Q` r?�i2p2` A K�v /Q- A K�v #2 �#H2 iQ };?i- Q` #2ii2` rQ`F- 7Q` ǴGB72- GB#2`iv- �M/ i?2 Tm`bmBi Q7 >�TTBM2bb-Ǵ 7Q` Kvb2H7- i?2 T2QTH2 Q7 Qi? Kv #2HB27- �M/ 7Q` i?Qb2 Q7 �M/ Qi?2`b- 7Q` 2p2`vQM2X h?2 1M/X R8j R89 �dd R88 R8e �d3 R8d R83 �h?Bb /Q+mK2Mi rQmH/ MQi #2 TQbbB#H2 rBi?Qmi i?2 +QMi`B#miBQMb Q7 i?2 7QHHQrBM; Greenfield Library Student Assistants, Jennings Caldwell, >�2BM *?Q, and Luke Klassen R8N � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Eva Brann Collection Description An account of the resource Please contact the library staff for more information about the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brann, Eva T. H. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this material. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data paper Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 78 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource I Came Across the Ocean Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brann, Eva T. H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1944-01-10 Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource Autobiographies Kristallnacht, 1938 Jews--Germany--History--1933-1945 Jewish refugees Berlin (Germany) Language A language of the resource English Description An account of the resource Autobiography written by Eva Brann for a school assignment in 1944, when she was 14 years old. The account covers her early childhood in pre-World War II Berlin, life as a Jewish child after Kristallnacht, escaping on a train through war-torn Europe, traveling to America on a refugee ship, and her hopes for the future. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context I Sailed Across the Ocean_1944 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Hyperlink A link, or reference, to another resource on the Internet. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data wav Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 01:35:16 URL https://youtu.be/CdEe-YRO8T4?si=loVmlE29_IM0Peyo Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <a href="https://youtu.be/CdEe-YRO8T4?si=loVmlE29_IM0Peyo">Thucydides on Peace, Peacemaking and Peacemakers</a> Description An account of the resource Video recording of a November 20, 2024 lecture and Q&A session by Karl Walling of the U.S. Naval War College. The conversation with Dr. Walling centers on the problem of peacemaking in the Peloponnesian War, and Thucydides’ preference to often call what some name peace, a mere truce. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Walling, Karl-Friedrich, 1957- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-20 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Type The nature or genre of the resource moving image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource YouTube video Subject The topic of the resource Peace-building Greece--History--Peloponnesian War, 431-404 B.C. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Peace Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Walling_Karl_2024-11-20_ac Alumni Friday night lecture Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Hyperlink A link, or reference, to another resource on the Internet. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data mov Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:50:55 URL https://youtu.be/AN1u-Lu1JVQ?si=djRxQwgjCfSj_KXX Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <a href="https://youtu.be/AN1u-Lu1JVQ?si=djRxQwgjCfSj_KXX">Aristophanes' <em>Clouds</em> and the Power of Logos</a> Description An account of the resource Video recording of a lecture delivered on November 15, 2024, by Stephanie Nelson as part of the Formal Lecture Series.<br /><br />Dr. Nelson (SJC Annapolis, 1983) is Professor of Classical Studies at Boston University and a Visiting Tutor at St. John’s. Her most recent book is titled, <em>Time and Identity in Ulysses and the Odyssey</em> (2023), and explores how each work benefits from being read alongside the other.<br /><br />Professor Nelson offers this introduction to her lecture: It is not too much of a stretch to say that Aristophanes’ <em>Clouds</em> is primarily about two topics: logos and the gods – and about Socrates’ relation to them both. Aristophanes, in his most serious playful manner, challenges us to think about who gets to be a god, and even, this lecture will suggest, proposes the Logoi as the real gods of human experience. The play thus asks us to consider both the nature of gods and the nature of logos, and in so doing juxtaposes the way that Socrates views the relation of logos and reality to the way the comic poet sees the same question. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Nelson, Stephanie A. (Stephanie Anne), 1958- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-15 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Type The nature or genre of the resource moving image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource YouTube video Subject The topic of the resource Aristophanes. Clouds Logos (Philosophy) Gods, Greek Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Nelson_Stephanie_2024-11-15_ac Alumni Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/8baa0060f818c33d1bc332b1cc02fbff.pdf b6db715ecdf7824532eadb3a05d114f7 PDF Text Text Footnotes to Aristotle St. John’s College, Annapolis Friday Night Lecture September 13, 2024 by Graham Harman This lecture will begin with exposition and end with what might sound like wild speculation. Alfred North Whitehead famously remarked that “[t]he safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato.” 1 Although my title tonight is a rephrasing of Whitehead’s remark, I don’t mean it to imply that he was wrong. The two greatest philosophers in the Western tradition are Plato and Aristotle, or maybe Aristotle and Plato. I tend to be suspicious of anyone who ranks them too quickly, so let’s leave that an open question, or maybe consider it as fodder for discussion after the lecture. Since I’ve already quoted Whitehead on behalf of Plato, let’s consider a powerful piece of testimony on the side of Aristotle. This comes from Julían Marías, a Spanish philosopher from the school of José Ortega y Gasset, in his history of philosophy: the first one I ever read. As Marías puts it there: “Whenever philosophy has established real contact with Aristotle, it has immediately become more precise and serious.” 2 One problem faced by any case for the importance of Aristotle is his reputation as a dull and dry purveyor of sterile classifications. Bertrand Russell, for instance, tells us that the Nicomachean Ethics “appeals to the respectable middle-aged,” that it is useful in “repress[ing] the ardours and enthusiasms of the young,” and that “to a man with any depth of feeling it is likely to be repulsive.” 3 Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality, p. 39. Julián Marías, History of Philosophy, p. 372. 3 Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, p. 147; Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. 1 2 �In response to Russell, I would say that while it is true that the surviving works of Aristotle lack the pathos and literary flourish of the Platonic dialogues, it is questionable whether Aristotle is either respectable or middle-aged in his outlook. In fact, in Aristotle I see a rather strange thinker who has been overly domesticated over the centuries. Throughout this lecture, I’ll be defending the virtues of strangeness in human thought. But the first clue that Aristotle is more offbeat and edgy than is usually believed can be seen in his often bizarre, endearingly morbid sense of humor. In his De Anima (or On the Soul) there is the odd remark that touch is the most important sense, because it is the only one that destroys us if we do it too hard. 4 In the Rhetoric, we find the chilling examples he gives of good luck: first, “such as if all of a man’s brothers are ugly but he is good-looking,” or this one: “if someone who regularly made a journey were the only one not to, while others did for the first time– and were killed.” 5 And finally, there is one of my favorite passages in the entire history of philosophy, from the Metaphysics, Book Gamma, Chapter 2: “For if it does not belong to the philosopher, then who will be the investigator of whether Socrates and Socrates seated are the same?” 6 On the whole, I find it easy to believe W.D. Ross when he reports that Aristotle had a “mocking disposition which showed itself in his [facial] expression.” 7 As Johnnies tend to know, Aristotle wrote a lot of great works. But since my real passion these days (and as far back as my Annapolis days from 1987 through 1990) is systematic philosophy, my concern tonight will be with the Physics and the Metaphysics. 8 We know the usual way of distinguishing these works from each other. The Physics refers to physis, or nature, thereby continuing the great tradition of speculative theories of nature launched by the pre-Socratics. The title Metaphysics, however, was presumably coined by Aristotle’s later editor Andronicus of Rhodes, and Aristotle, De Anima, p. 76. Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, 1362a. 6 Aristotle, Metaphysics, p, 48. 7 W.D. Ross, Aristotle, p. 7. 8 Aristotle, Physics; Aristotle, Metaphysics. 4 5 2 �simply referred to ta meta ta physika, or what comes after the physics. 9 Since the prefix meta- can also refer to matters beyond physics, and thus beyomnd nature altogether. Let’s assume that the details of this story are accurate; I have no direct archival evidence to challenge it, not do I have any wish to do so. My purpose, instead, is to give a different interpretation of the difference between the Physics and the Metaphysics. Here is that interpretation. The Physics is about the continuous, and the Metaphysics is about the discontinuous, also known as the discrete. The continuum, or συνεχές, refers to an unbroken stretch of anything: so unbroken, in fact, that it consists of no definite number of pieces. The examples of continua given in the Physics include time, space, and physical motion. Any continuum is divisible into as many parts as we please. We can say with equal accuracy that this lecture tonight is made up of three parts, or seventy-nine, or twelve million. We can put as many numbers as we want on the number line between zero and 100. The discrete, by contrast, is that which is independent, autonomous, and which cannot be arbitrarily sliced up however we wish. The best example in the Metaphysics, of course, is primary substance, or πρώτη οὐσία. But Aristotle gives another example of discreteness, one that may be surprising: qualitative change. If a stone is worn away in a river, this does not happen gradually and continuously: in some moments a chunk breaks off the stone, while in other moments nothing happens at all. But I would go even further than this. This quarrel between the continuous and the discrete is not only central to Aristotle’s philosophy, but is one of the central intellectual distinctions in our entire intellectual history. Before diving into Aristotle, allow me to give some examples. For more than a century, the foundations of physics have been troubled by the incompatibility of its two central pillars: quantum theory (for electromagnetism as well as the strong and weak nuclear forces) 9 Peter van Inwagen, Meghan Sullivan, & Sara Bernstein, “Metaphysics.” 3 �and general relativity (for gravity). In 2012 I sat on a panel with the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger, who would later win the Nobel Prize for teleporting photons across the Danube. At dinner afterward, I took the liberty of asking him about the most promising avenue for unification of quantum theory and general relativity. He responded as follows: “I haven’t the foggiest idea. But since some of the world’s most intelligent people (if I may immodestly say so) have worked on this problem without success for more than a century, it will probably be something completely from out of left field.” What exactly is that problem? It is often explained as it was in a 2022 article in The Guardian: “Physicists agree that the theory of quantum mechanics applies to very tiny particles, and Einstein’s theory of general relativity applies to larger objects.” 10 A similar explanation is given by prominent American scientist Michio Kaku in one of his helpful physics bestsellers, The God Equation. 11 As rules of thumb go, this one is not so bad: it is true that quantum effects (such as the indeterminacy of position and momentum) are most easily observed at the level of tiny entities such as particles. Meanwhile, general relativity is most useful at the scale of astronomical events involving gigantic masses and vast stretches of time, where the effects of gravity on space-time become most obvious And yet, this rule of thumb isn’t entirely accurate. The probabilistic effects of quantum mechanics are observable even at the relatively large scale of atoms and molecules, and could even be detected at the level of mid-sized everyday objects (dogs, shoes, airplanes) if the wavelengths of such objects weren’t too short for quantum effects to be easily measured. Conversely, general relativity applies to the bending of spacetime by all masses, not just extremely large ones. Your own body distorts nearby space with its mass, though the effect is too tiny to be noticeable. 10 11 Stephen Buranyi, “Do We Need a New Theory of Evolution?” Michio Kaku, The God Equation, p. 141. Kindle edition. 4 �Shifting the focus away from small and large objects, the tension between quantum theory and general relativity is better understood in terms of the opposition between the discrete and the continuous. Quantum theory treats the world as made up of tiny chunks, as with photons of light, while general relativity treats it as a continuous bending of space and time, as with starlight bending when it passes near the sun’s gravitational pull, confirmed by Arthur Stanle Eddington in his measurements during the 1919 solar eclipse. The central problem is that of the interaction between the continuous and the discrete; this is the reason for the deadlock faced by physics for more than a century. While quantum theory tells us we’re living in a world full of sudden jumps and tiniest units, general relativity envisions the cosmos as a continuous bending. How can discrete particles move through a spatio-temporal continuum? We might also speak of evolutionary biology, and the conflict between the continuous and the discrete in that field. In 1972, Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould introduced their concept of “punctuated equilibrium” in opposition to what they called the “phyletic gradualism” of Darwin’s tradition. 12 According to Eldredge and Gould, species change does not happen through the slow work of natural selection, but occurs rather suddenly in geological time. The great American biologist Lynn Margulis (and you really should all read her if you haven’t already) added her own theory of sudden change to the mix, through the idea that evolution occurs through symbiosis between previously separate life forms. 13 We could also add Thomas Kuhn’s theory of science as consisting of punctuated “paradigm shifts” rather than gradual and cumulative triumphs of rationality. 14 And if architecture is more your style (and I had to learn it on the fly when hired by SCI-Arc eight years ago) we can also speak of the dispute between the jarringly discontuous architecture of the 1988 Deconstructivism show a the MoMA in New York, and the 1993 Niles Eldredge & Stephen Jay Gould. “Punctuated Equilibria.” Lynn Margulis, Symbiotic Planet. 14 Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 12 13 5 �appearance of a countercurrent in favor of smoothness and continuity in architecture: inspired by the philosopher Gilles Deleuze, and especially visible in the style of Zaha Hadid. 15 In fact, scratch the surface of any intellectual conflict, and you are likely to find some version of the dispute between the continuous and the discrete. To understand why this topic matters, there is no better place to turn than Aristotle’s own works. Aristotle on the Continuous Aristotle develops his idea of continuity through a critical assessment of Anaximander’s apeiron, which refers to the cosmos as a single indeterminate whole, a boundless expanse without qualities or parts. Aristotle rejects this by noting that nothing is ever just one: does the apeiron not even have a size or shape? If it does, then its size and its shape are something in addition to its unity. Consider the following simple case, using a number other than one. If I say there are five apples and five bananas sitting on the kitchen counter, the number five is the same in both cases, though of course the apples and bananas differ greatly from each other in qualitative terms. Apples are round and red, bananas are oblong and yellow, just to start. The quantity also tells us nothing about the condition of the fruit: whether it’s underripe, ready to eat, or already blackened or oversoft. If we turn our attention to a single banana, it’s fine to say that the banana is one thing, but only if we recognize that this same banana also has hundreds, perhaps thousands of qualities (yellowness, oblongness, curvature, etc). This means that while the banana is one thing, it is also many when viewed from the standpoint of its qualities. As trivial as this may sound, it eventually becomes an important point for Leibniz in Monadology §8, and Leibniz will become important for us tonight as well. 16 15 16 Philip Johnson & Wark Wigley. Deconstructivist Architecture; Gilles Deleuze, The Fold. G.W. Leibniz, Philosophical Essays, p. 214. 6 �In the days before subatomic particles were discovered, it was thought that atoms were indivisible: pure units without parts. But in 1897 J.J. Thomson discovered the first subatomic particle: the electron, known for its tiny mass and negative electric charge. In 1911 Ernest Rutherford discovered that atoms are not uniform, but have a tiny nucleus made up of protons, which are much larger than electrons and have a positive charge. In 1932 James Chadwick discovered the neutron, which is essentially just a proton with a neutral rather than positive charge. Then in 1964 it was theorized independently by Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig that even protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles, called “quarks,” whose existence was experimentally proven in 1968. Hence we no longer say that atoms are the smallest unit of nature, but can say instead that physical matter is made of quarks and electrons. This bit of recent scientific history would not have bothered Aristotle at all, since of course he didn’t believe in the existence of uncuttable atoms anyway: as we know, the word atom literally means that which cannot be cut. And we know that Aristotle thought matter to be continuous, meaning that it can be cut into smaller and smaller pieces as far as we wish, without ever reaching some ultimate, uncuttable unit. If he were alive today, he would presumably think that both quarks and electrons could still be divided into smaller units ad nauseam. At any rate, Aristotle did not embrace the idea that the apeiron could be one in the sense of being purely simple and without parts; as we have seen, nothing exists that does not have multiple qualities. Yet he did accept the idea of the continuum, referring to a continuous stretch of anything that can be divided infinitely downward as far as we please. In his own words: “the continuous is divisible without limit.” 17 This is obvious enough in the case of the number line, which contains as many numbers as we want it to have: there is no obstacle to our putting hundreds or even millions of numbers on the line between the neighboring integers 1 and 2. But this seems to mean that every 17 Aristotle, Physics, p. 4. 7 �continuum is always multiple, not one, which seems contradictory. This multiplicity of the continuum had already caused problems in the eyes of Zeno of Elea, since it entailed that there are infinitely many points between any two given points, leading him to reject the existence of motion. For Aristotle, by contrast, the reality of motion had to be protected at all costs, since his entire philosophy is in some sense designed to explain motion. Be that as it may, he doesn’t discount the idea of an unlimited apeiron as simply false. He does think this concept is sometimes useful, because if we decide that the unlimited doesn’t exist, he says, then “many impossibilities result,” just like when “we posit that it does exist.” 18 In particular, if we deny the existence of the unlimited, Aristotle thinks that three impossible consequences follow. First, there will be “a start and an end of time.” Second, magnitudes, or quantities will not always “be divisible into magnitudes” in their own right. And third, “number will not be unlimited.” 19 Since all of these points are interesting, let’s take them one at a time. The first impossibility is that without the unlimited, there will be “a start and an end of time.” Aristotle’s shock at this notion is always difficult for us moderns to grasp. Both our monotheistic religions and our state-of-the-art Big Bang astrophysics tell us that the universe was created at some point in time, and will come to an end at some later point in time. But of course that is not Aristotle’s conception of the world. As he sees it, there has always been time and always will be time. It is worth recalling that he does not think the same about space. In his view, space only extends as far as the outermost sphere of the heavens: namely, the rotating spheres where premodern physics said that all the stars were located, moving around the earth in unison at a distance further from us than the planets. 20 Aristotle, Physics, p. 45. Aristotle, Physics, p. 49. 20 On the modern replacement of this theory see Alexandre Koyré, From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe. 18 19 8 �The second impossibility concerns magnitudes, or quantities. Take any number: four, for example. We can slice four into a pair of twos or into four separate ones. But we don’t have to stop there. We can cut up the ones into ever-tinier fractions, meaning that our original number four can be carved up into as many smaller units as we wish. Given this ability to keep dividing things into ever-tinier components without end, something like the unlimited must exist. Without it we would eventually arrive at the ultimate smallest units of mathematics, which do not exist. Aristotle’s view is that this is true not only of number, but also of time, space, and matter. All of these are examples of continua, meaning that they can be split into pieces as small as we wish without ever arriving at a smallest part. From this endless division of numbers into smaller parts, we advance to the third impossibility, which concerns the increase of numbers through addition. I was just a small child when my mother taught me how to count to 100; I remember becoming discouraged and starting to cry somewhere in the low seventies, thinking that we would never reach the goal. While for many children 100 symbolizes an immense quantity of anything, it’s obviously a paltry sum compared with numbers used even for everyday purposes, such as financial transactions, and that’s to say nothing of higher mathematics. Indeed, just a few years after my traumatic march to 100, I took childish delight in imagining ever larger numbers, simply adding zeroes and other digits to an initial numeral, or engaging in mental exploits of repeated doubling or tripling. Such cases show that the limitless must exist, since otherwise we would eventually arrive at a highest number and not be able to go beyond it. Note that this cannot be refuted simply by saying “infinity.” For one thing, infinity is technically not a number. For another, the mathematician Georg Cantor proved in the nineteenth century that there are infinitely many different infinities, all of different sizes. 21 21 Georg Cantor, Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers. 9 �At first glance, Aristotle’s points about division and addition might seem to be the same. We can divide any number into as many pieces as we like, or add to any number as much we like; both procedures have no limit other than personal patience. But Aristotle notes a crucial difference between them. 22 In the case of division the total amount is already contained in the starting point, while in the case of unlimited increase it is not. To give an example, when we take the number four and begin cutting it indefinitely into tinier pieces, we never get beyond the four that we already had at the start; we are merely subdividing an already known quantity, no matter how minutely we explore its interior. Yet when we play the reverse game of increasing the number four as far as our imagination will take us, we immediately get beyond four and even reach numbers absurdly greater than our initial one. The unlimited cannot be some greatest encompassing cosmic whole, since for every quantity, no matter how large, there is always a larger one. In other words, there is no infinite container that holds everything, but every finite amount of matter, number, space, and time contains an infinite amount of increasingly tiny units inside itself. This is one of my favorite counterintuitive points in the Physics. Yet by conceding the existence of limitless divisibility, Aristotle seems to have fallen directly into Zeno’s trap. It is impossible to reach the dorway, since between us and the door there exists an infinite number of halfway points; it is impossible for Achilles to pass the turtle in a footrace, since whenever Achilles runs to where the turtle was, the turtle will have run some incresaingly infinitesimal distance past that point. Zeno’s underlying point is that if space is infinitely divisible then motion will be impossible, since we cannot possibly move through an infinite number of points. The problem is that Aristotle also holds that space is infinitely divisble, which seems to commit him to the impossibility of motion as well. Of course, we know that Aristotle has a strategy for escaping this predicament, and it is one of the keys not only to his Physics, but to his philosophy 22 Aristotle, Physics, pp. 52-53. 10 �as a whole. This involves his distinction between the actual and the potential, one that is familiar to us today from everyday language and experience. The classic example is the celebrated acorn: it is an actual acorn but a potential oak tree, meaning that its acorn-qualities right now are not the full story of its reality. Although an acorn is not currently an oak tree, and a kitten is also not currently an oak tree, the status of “not being an oak tree” is obviously different in the two cases. We can think of the acorn as a repository of forces not currently expressed, but that might someday shape it into a lofty, sturdy oak; a kitten, presumably, will never grow into an oak tree without horrific genetic manipulations that lie beyond the scope of present-day science. The same holds for a human infant who is capable of very little at present, but might someday lead a large bank or artificial intelligence laboratory, or perhaps a street protest against these same institutions. Likewise, there is the infamous San Andreas fault, not far from where I live. Although quiet at this moment in 2024, the fault is likely to be the site of a major earthquake at some point in the next fifty years, presumably causing widespread destruction. Ultimately, what Aristotle is after with his discussion of the actual and the potential is an account of motion, which he famously defines as the activation of what is potential insofar as it is potential. 23 When an acorn grows into an oak tree, this involves the activation of what used to potential in the acorn, whereas the kitten had the potential to be an oak. As another example, consider a piece of bronze sitting on a worker’s table in Athens. We can say that it is actually bronze and actually located in Athens rather than somewhere else. Hence there is no way to actualize its bronzeness and its presence in Athens, since both of these are already accomplished facts, not future possibilities. If we want the bronze to change in some way, we need to draw on its potentiality rather than its actuality. In this spirit, we can say that the bronze is potentially a sword and potentially located in Miletus, and if we have the proper metal-working skill and means of transportation, we 23 Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 189. 11 �can actualize these potentials. For Aristotle, the activation of potentials is what motion means. However, we need to keep in mind that for Aristotle “motion” refers to any sort of change, whether it be an acorn growing into an oak or a person becoming old and tired. It is not like modern physics, where “motion” refers exclusively to the movement of objects in space. This difference between potential and actual has a good case to be called the center of Aristotle’s philosophy. At one point he even describes being not as unified, but as “twofold.” As he puts it: “Everything changes from what is potentiality to what is actively.” 24 On that note we return to Zeno’s paradoxes, which Aristotle addresses by way of his actual/potential distinction. Zeno is correct, Aristotle says, that it would be impossible to reach the doorway if we actually had to pass through an infinite number of points in between. Our movement to the door would not be continuous and eventually successful, but would “come to a standstill,” since we could never even reach the next point on our way to the door, let alone the door itself. 25 There is no “next” point, after all, since between where we are and even a close nearby point there are infinitely many other points in between. The reason motion really does occur is that the path from our current position to the doorway is not actually made of an infinite number of points, but only potentially so. 26 (VIII.8) In other words, splitting any length of space into separate points is something we do as a kind of mental exercise; it does not really govern our motion in space. This means that Zeno’s examples fail. The so-called paradox of the arrow is another of Zeno’s most famous, and Aristotle challenges this one as well. Imagine that an archer fires an arrow directly at a target. Obviously, the fired arrow always appears to be moving. But if we closely consider any particular moment of its flight, the arrow must be in some definition position, which means that it is motionless in that point. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 199. Aristotle, Physics, p. 164. 26 Aristotle, Physics, p. 164; emph. added. 24 25 12 �But if it is always motionless at any given moment, how can it also be moving? Predictably enough, this leads Zeno to claim that the arrow does not actually move, and that (once again) all motion is just an illusion generated by our senses. Aristotle rightly notes that this argument relies on a questionable assumption. Namely, the arrow paradox “results from assuming that time is composed of nows.” 27 In other words, Zeno reasons that in any distinct temporal instant, the arrow must occupy some definite spatial position. But Aristotle does not think that time is made of distinct instants, any more than he thinks a line is made of indivisible points. Euclid’s geometry would later define a point as “that which has no part,” and beyond this, we already know that no matter how closely we place two points together, we can always add an unlimited number of additional points between them. 28 This is why Aristotle contends that the same principle applies to time and space, not just magnitude. 29 In the case of the arrow paradox, there is no definite number of moments between the time the arrow is fired and the time it strikes the target. No two nows can be contiguous for the same reason that no two points on the number line can be: we can always add another now between any two nows that seem to be consecutive. Aristotle makes some additional remarks about time in much the same spirit. Since he views time as a continuum, there can be no definite “now” in which something begins to happen. The moment of falling in love or turning toward the dark side can never be pinpointed exactly, for the simple reason that nothing in time can ever be located in a single instant. He also makes the crucial point that our sense of time is rooted in our observation of change. As he notes, “when we ourselves do not change in our thought or do not notice that we change, then it does not seem to us that time has passed.” 30 (IV.11) This is important because many philosophers seem to think of time Aristotle, Physics, p. 120. Euclid, The Thirteen Books of the Elements, p. 153. 29 Aristotle, Physics, p. 102. 30 Aristotle, Physics, p. 76. 27 28 13 �as something like a wind tunnel: as if it were a disembodied force that caused things to change, when it is really just our way of measuring change. To repeat, if there were truly an infinite number of halfway points between me and the door, Zeno would be correct: not only could I never reach the doorway, I could never move at all. For there would be an infinite number of halfway points between my current position and even a close nearby point. Aristotle’s response was that only in a derivative way can we conceive of space as made up of distinct parts: the continuum is actually one, but potentially many. From an Aristotelian standpoint, Zeno’s paradoxes pose no threat to the existence of motion. By introducing his concept of potentiality, Aristotle has no need to say that the continuum actually has an infinite number of parts to it. It is enough to say that we can potentially divide the continuum into as many pieces as we please: in our minds, that is. But the world in which motion takes place is continuous, unfolding over undivided stretches of space. If I want to walk to the door, I simply walk to the door. There is no actual infinity of points I must cross in order to do so. The shift from Zeno’s to Aristotle’s understanding teaches us that motion is real. This means that Aristotle’s extensive physics of motion (which includes all forms of change, not just physical movement) is able to get off the ground. As we know, it would become an extremely useful tool not only in the ancient world, but also in early Islamic civilization and then in Medieval Europe, before being rejected decisively by seventeenthcentury physics. Aristotle on the Discrete Looking back on the pre-Socratics, we can see that their apeiron counts as a continuum, even though the pre-Socratics never explicitly defined it that way. Like the number line, it is boundless, in the sense that it extends without limit in every direction, and also consists of no definite number of parts. How, then, can we move from the boundless apeiron to the multitude of individual beings we 14 �see all around us? At least two pre-Socratic thinkers offered origin stories in which the apeiron was broken up into countless pieces. 31 According to Pythagoras, the apeiron inhaled the void, leading to something like tiny bubbles or vacua separating parts of the apeiron from each other, yielding what we know today as individual things. Anaxagoras gives us a different version, in which nous or mind caused the apeiron to rorate so rapidly that it vibrated excessively and finally broke into tiny pieces: the homoiomeraeiai. In those pre-Socratics who believed in the apeiron were adopting a basically continuous model of reality, while those who believed instead in ultimate physical elements (whether water, air, number, atoms, or four separate elements) were advocates of a discrete conception of the world. Aristotle is the first person we know of who divided them into these two groups: a decision probably motivated by his own joint fascination with the continuous (the Physics) and the discrete (the Metaphysics). Speaking of the Metaphysics, potentiality and actuality also continue to play an important role in this work, though a different one. Aristotle is quick to inform us that the question here is no longer about objects being unable to move through an actual number of intermediate points. The important issue in the Metaphysics is qualitative change. Namely, if an object were nothing more than its current, actual state, it would never be able to change at all; potentiality is therefore needed as the engine of all transformation. Of course, this is not an imaginary concern aimed at a straw man opponent: Aristotle was engaged in dispute at the time with a rival philosophical school, the Megarians, who held that a thing is no more than its sum total of current activities. The Megarians were named after their small home city of Megara, which still exists to the west of Athens today. The leader of the school was one Euclides, a former student of Socrates. Aristotle summarizes their doctrine in the Metaphysics as follows: “someone who is not building is not capable of building, but 31 See Eduard Zeller, Outlines of the History of Ancient Philosophy. 15 �someone who is building is capable if and when he is building, and similarly in the other cases.” 32 In simpler terms, no one is a house builder unless they are building a house at this very moment. But Aristotle is unconvinced. He complains that according to the Megarian teaching, when someone stops building, “he will not possess the craft,” meaning that they will no longer be builders once they stop, or even while they take a lunch break. But this is absurd, because “if he starts again immediately, how will he have learned again how to make use of this craft?” 33 In other words, there is a big difference between a master house builder who currently happens to be asleep, and those of us who are awake and may even have tools in our hands, but have no idea what to do in order to build a house. Far from being an outmoded way of thinking, the Megarian approach is tacitly adopted even by some recent authors. A good example is my late lamented friend, the French philosopher Bruno Latour. The method he helped develop for the social sciences is called Actor-Network Theory; it maintains, like the Megarians, that everything is equivalent to its sum total of actions here and now. 34 As Latour puts it, objects (which he calls “actors”) can only be defined by their actions. There is no other way to define an action than by asking what other actors it modifies, transforms, perturbs, or creates. 35 A thing is the effects it has on other things, and nothing more. In this way, Latour and his colleagues devised a technique for analyzing any situation by focusing on what things do, rather than getting lost in speculation about what their hidden properties might be. And as a method for the social sciences, it has yielded many fruits. One of these fruits is that Latour is able to attack theories that try to explain reality with such fuzzy abstractions as “Science,” “Society,” or “Capitalism.” Instead of these terms, the Actor- Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 145. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 145. 34 Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social. For an admiring but critical commentary see Graham Harman, Prince of Networks. 35 Bruno Latour, Pandora’s Hope, p. 122. 32 33 16 �Network theorist tries to look more concretely at what every human and non-human actor is doing in a given situation. For instance, the French historian Fernand Braudel (much admired by Latour) writes a history of capitalism that does not take this economic system for granted, but actually looks at the European development of local markets into regional markets, regional markets into national ones, and finally national markets into international monopolies. 36 When one thing transforms into another, Latour insists that we explain each step, and not just say that the later ones existed in advance in the earlier ones. We cannot say that a cake is “already there in the recipe,” since from raw ingredients to the final cake there are a number of steps that must be properly executed, and these must be specified. We could certainly call the ingredients “a potential cake,” but for Latour this idea of potentiality risks intellectual laziness. He would agree with the Megarians that we should focus solely on actual things and what is needed to turn them into different things. And in the case of the house-builder discussed by the Megarians, Latour would surely agree that a house-builder is simply whoever is building a house at this very moment. 37 Aristotle counters such ideas by insisting that if everything were completely actual, then nothing could ever change. At the moment of writing these words I was typing on an Apple MacBook Air computer while sitting at our dining table in Long Beach, California. Yet this is no longer the case. I am now on a journey into my distant undergraduate past in Annapolis. Forty-eight hours from now I may be at the supermarket in Long Beach instead. Aristotle would say that all this is possible only because I have the potential to change my current situation; without such potential, I would have been forever frozen in the act of sitting at home and typing. In similar fashion, a happy person is potentially sad, and a dusty little pearl-fishing village called Dubai was potentially a wealthy world metropolis, which is exactly what it became. These Fernand Braudel, Civilization and Capitalism, 3 vols. For another interesting defense of the Megarians see Nicolai Hartmann, “The Megarian and the Aristotelian Concept of Potentiality.” 36 37 17 �scenarios are not properly accounted for by either he Megarians or Latour. We surely all remember the difference between potential energy and kinetic energyfromn high school physics: whenever something occurs in the world, it is because one or more entities were previously in a position to make it happen before it actually did. A vase was stationed precariously on a windowsill ten floors above the sidewalk and thus it was able to fall in a strong wind; an athletic young girl had abundant energy stored in her muscles and for this reason was able to climb the tree in front of the school. I’d like to lay special stress on Aristotle’s passion for movement and change since, in recent decades, his theory of enduring individual substances has unfairly earned him the reputation of a boring philosopher of stasis. He warns us against a tendency that is still widespread today: the frequent proclamation that “everything is in flux,” all is changing constantly, nothing remains the same. Aristotle responds that this statement isn’t quite true, since nature contains rest as well as movement. Just as importantly, change in nature is not usually gradual or continuous: if a stone is worn away by a river, this happens in jumps rather than continuously. That is to say, a stone being worn away in a river does not lose the same number of particles in every second; instead, sometimes nothing changes, but all of a sudden a significant piece of the stone is broken away. Likewise, when we read Edward Gibbon’s great multi-volume work on the decline and fall of Rome, we do not find an equal amount of Roman decline on every page; there are specific moments in Gibbon’s history where decay is unusually rapid or severe, and others in which it is even reversed for awhile. 38 The renewed embrace of radical flux and flow in recent philosophy has unjustly diminished Aristotle’s reputation as an innovator. But he is nothing if not a philosopher of movement. Substance 38 Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 3 vols. 18 �Alongside his insights about motion, what Aristotle has to say about primary substance, prote ousia, discrete individual entities, is of equal interest. Of the two groups of pre-Socratic thinkers, those who focused on ultimate physical elements (water, air, atoms) were downward reductionists who dissolved everything into its smallest pieces. While it can be very useful to know what something is made of, this can also lead us to overlook important features of the original substance. For instance, we know that water both puts out fires and quenches thirst, though neither of these capacities are found in its smaller ingredients, hydrogen and oxygen. I call this form of reduction “undermining,” since it dissolves individual things in favor of their smaller components or perhaps their causal backstories. 39 Later in ancient Greek philosophy we find the Sophists, frequently attacked by Socrates and Plato. One of them, Protagoras, is famous for saying that “man is the measure of all things.” This amounts to the upward reduction that I all “overmining,” since it shifts attention from the inherent constitution of things to the question of how these things affect the human mind, or possibly how they affect everything else, as in Latour’s Actor-Network Theory. The right way to avoid these two extreme methods is to focus on things that are neither the smallest nor the largest components of the cosmos, and this is exactly what Aristotle does. For this reason he is often mocked as being obsessed with “mid-sized everyday objects,” though we can easily turn this formula against his critics by saying that they are obsessed either with “tiny-sized physical objects” or “largesized cosmic wholes.” Medium-sized things also have an important place in philosophy. Like most trailblazers, Aristotle is sometimes inconsistent about his central topic. In the Metaphysics he not only asks the question “What is substance?” at least five times, but gives slightly different answers in each case. At times he insists that nothing is more a substance than anything else: the sun is more powerful and durable than a dragonfly, but the dragonfly is just as much a dragonfly as the sun is the sun, and hence they are equally substances. At other times he speaks of 39 See Graham Harman, “Undermining, Overmining, and Duomining.” 19 �substance in the comparative terms of one thing being “more” or “less” substance than another. For instance: “substance seems to belong most evidently to bodies. That is why we say that animals and plants and their parts are substances, and also natural bodies, such as fire, water, earth, and each thing of this sort.” 40 Later he stresses that whatever is natural is somehow more substance than a table or anything else put together by human artifice. For Aristotle, substance means many things. It is a unity over and above the sum of its parts; it is a somewhat inscrutable thing which can never be adequately defined in words, since things are concrete while definitions use universals; it has the capacity to have opposite qualities at different times; and it has abundant reserves of currently unexpressed potential. But perhaps most importantly, the concept of substance is needed in order to ensure that the discreteness of reality is taken just as seriously as its equally real continuous character. According to Aristotle, “everyone” in his time agrees that earth, water, fire, plants, and the sky are substances. So too are “bodies in general and the things composed of them, both animals and divine beings, and the parts of these. Each of these is said to be a substance because it is not said of an underlying subject but rather the other things are said of it.” 41 (Delta 8) The grammatical differene between nouns and adjectives make this easy to understand. We say “the car is green,” not “the green is car”; this shows that we recognize the car as the underlying substance and its color an accidental quality that can be modified if we wish. While some have criticized Aristotle for assuming that the structure of language is an accurate guide to reality, he is certainly correct that the car appears to us as a more robust thing than its green color. Normally, we do not see enduring colors taking on the form of different objects, though it is quite common for objects to change color. 40 41 Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 105. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 79; emph. added. 20 �Furthermore, just as we saw in the case of the apeiron, an object cannot simply be one, since it will always have multiple qualities; yet a substance must also be one so as to unify its many qualities. As Aristotle puts it: “of all things that have several parts and where the totality of them is not like a heap, but the whole is something beyond the parts, there is some cause of it.” 42 By way of example, he notes that a “syllable is not its phonetic elements, BA is not the same as B and A, nor is flesh fire and earth. For when they –for example, the flesh and the syllable– are dissolved they no longer exist, whereas the phonetic elements do exist, and so do the fire and the earth.” 43 Though we no longer share the widespread ancient Greek view that fire and earth are indestructible physical elements, we can still take his point that the whole is something more than its sum total of parts. Despite its unity, a substance must always be composite as well: not only in the qualities it possesses, but also in the parts of which it is formed. In this way Aristotle brushes against the later notion of emergence. 44 Although a substance has parts, it is not reducible to them, since otherwise it would be a mere collection rather than a unified substance. If someone tried to name a new substance composed jointly from France, red pepper, and the music of Mozart, we would quickly conclude that these three random objects do not form a unified substance with emergent properties of its own. It is rather different if we list water, tomato paste, kidney beans, and spice: in this case we are inclined to say they are unified in the substance “chili.” Although Aristotle surely would not recognize chili as a substance, I am inclined to do so, given that chili has a certain je ne sais quoi not found in its ingredients when taken in isolation. And conversely, the ingredients should also be treated as substances, since of them has an independent reality that is not entirely transformed the chili as a whole. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 141. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 132. 44 See Manuel DeLanda, “Emergence, Causality, and Realism”; Niki Young, “Object, Reduction, and Emergence.” 42 43 21 �But we have just touched on an interesing problem. For is it really the case that the various ingredients of a whole both retain their independence and simultaneously belongs to the larger substance of which they are ingredients? For example, if a berry bush is a substance, then is each of the individual berries also a substance? In one passage Aristotle does say that the parts of animals and plants are substances just like animals and plants themselves. 45 But a more characteristically Aristotelian answer comes when he says “it is only when the whole has been dissolved” that the parts can exist as substances in their own right. 46 In terms of our example, this means that individual berries are not substances unless they are picked. Until that occurs, they are only “potentially” substances, since they remain subordinated to the unity of the plant as a whole, which is considered the only substance on the scene until berry-picking occurs. Quite aside from berries, it is easy to see why Aristotle might think that a liver or kidney could be treated as part of a unified human substance, and might think as well that these organs only become independent in cases where overall bodily function breaks down. Organ transplants were unknown in his time, but familiar to us today: a healthy organ is removed from a deceased donor and shipped elsewhere to be transplanted into a needy recipient. During its period of transit from one body to another, the organ could easily be viewed as an independent substance. Since Aristotle would make the same point for the parts of plants, we can see his willingness to think that the status of “substance” is always temporary and contingent. As mentioned, Aristotle has a tendency to favor nature as the ultimate authority on what counts as a substance and what does not. Berries may exist as substances once they are picked, but a raspberry pie could never count for Aristotle as a substance, given his general suspicion of artificially produced things. In our own time, we are less likely to share his prejudice in favor of nature. Today’s 45 46 Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 105. Aristotle, Metaphysics, p. 82. 22 �world is brimming with artificially produced objects that nonetheless behave like substances: chemical molecules synthesized in laboratories as in the case of medical drugs, important “transuranian” elements such as plutonium that are rarely found in nature, not to mention airplanes, cars, drones, robots, and medical prostheses, along with the European Union and the International Olympic Committee. The fact that complex machines do not occur naturally in forests does not automatically entail that coffee grinders are less deserving of the name “substance” than strawberries. This is especially clear once we recall the centuries of careful breeding and fattening needed to produce the highly edible, but perhaps more tasteless bright red strawberries we purchase in supermarkets today. In our own time, when natural science is usually viewed as the gold standard of knowledge, it might seem antiquated that Aristotle praises philosophy as the superior discipline. The reason he gives (despite his own scientific accomplishments) is that only philosophy is concerned with substance. I take his point to be as follows. Given that substance is what endures despite all changes in it qualities, and given as well that we cannot define any substance in words, there is something elusive about it that makes it difficult to measure adequately or paraphrase in exact prose language. That makes substance a good match for philosophia, which is always the love of a wisdom that can never fully be had rather than a direct form of wisdom itself. By contrast, the natural sciences will always favor that which is more tangible and directly discernible; substance itself is neither of these things, but is somehow deeper than all its visible or testable features. The adoration of precise quantitative measurement in the sciences is one of the reasons modern thought dismisses Aristotelian substance as outmoded, or as not very useful. But how might this dismissal be reversed if we increase our awareness that knowledge is not the only form of human cognition? There are really only two kinds of knowledge, in the end. If someone asks us what something is, we can either tell them what it is made of (which amounts to undermining), tell them what it does (which amounts 23 �to overmining), or tell them both at once (which I call “duomining,” a term borrowed from the credit card industry, where it has the appropriately sinister meaning of data-mining and text-mining someone simultaneously). Some social networks can predict with 90 percent accuracy where you will be tomorrow, and some credit card companies have algorithms that use changes in spending patterns to predict divorce several years in advance. All of this is knowledge. But a full picture of human cognition requires knowledge to be supplemented with philosophia, aesthetic sensibility, practical know-how, political instincts, personal empathy, and what psychoanalysis calls the “truth” of symptoms, along with other intuitions and skills. The fact that some things exist only in shadow does not make them less real than the things that sit in direct sunlight. None of this means that we need to agree with Aristotle’s own hierarchy, which places philosophy on top of science. I for one do not agree, just as I would not agree that a globe of the earth is “better” than a street map of Los Angeles; obviously, which of the two is better depends on what you are trying to do. But present-day society is so enamored of the exactitude, the concrete achievements, and even the monetizable industrial results of natural science that philosophy has reached something close to the historical low point of its prestige. This can be seen from the fact that so many present-day philosophers try to be recognized as “scientific” in their thinking, while few scientists aspire to be called philosophers anymore, unlike in previous centuries. Although it is often assumed inc ontemporary philosophy that Aristotle’s theory of substance is dated, it does have many powerful features. Some present-day philosophies wish to treat substances (or discrete objects more generally) as nothing more than arbitrary chunks torn out of a primal whole by the human mind alone, as if the world really were just a continuum. 47 Yet this position contradicts itself by assuming in advance that the mind is independent enough from the whole to be able to perform the work of creating individual things from whole cloth: in other words, 47 See Thomas Nail, Being in Motion; Thomas Nail, “Is Nature Continuous or Discrete?” 24 �there are no specific objects unless a human mind is there to produce them. These contemporary theories are actually traceable to Anaxagoras, and his view that a powerful mind causes the whole to rotate, vibrate, and shatter. But who uphold such views need to explain how, in a supposedly unified cosmos, the mind was different enough from this unity to be able to produce the discrete in the first place. The Problem of Interface To summarize, Aristotle views time, space, motion, and number as continuous, but substance and qualitative change as discontinuous. This leaves us with the question of how these two domains could ever interact, since otherwise they would represent two separate and parallel worlds with two different sets of rules. In a world of perfect continuity, individual substances would exist only as delusions of the senses, which is precisely what Parmenides and Zeno thought. And in a world of perfect discreteness, nothing could interact with anything else: everything would remain isolated in its unique individuality, which is precisely why Leibniz said monads (his name for substances) have no windows, and why he called upon divine intervention as the only possible solution for how his monads could communicate. 48 If two things are continuous, this means that they blend into one; if two things are separate, this means they do not touch at all. What interests us, and certainly interests Aristotle as well, is the intermediate case where two object touch without blending together. Aristotle’s term for this middle case is “contact,” a concept he never sufficiently develops. The problem is knowing exactly where contact occurs. Of course, common sense sees no problem here: I am a substance, my friend is a substance, and it is easy for us to make contact simply by shaking hands. But difficulties soon arise. For one thing, I am not the same as my hand and my friend is not the same as his hand, since in 48 G.W. Leibniz, Theodicy. 25 �both cases the hand is merely part of each of us. Thus we could say no more than that shaking hands is merely a contact of hands, not of people, and then we would need to know how a part of me (like my hand) can have any effect on me as a unified being. Beyond that, we cannot even say that the two hands touch while shaking. After all, the hands do not meet in some sort of obscene total surface contact, but only at a limited number of points along the outer layer of skin, so that now we need to know how those limited points on the skin are able to affect the hand as a whole, and so on. The contact between two things is more problematic than the physical assumptions of everyday life would lead us to believe. Descartes faced an analogous problem when trying to determine where his two finite substances (mind and body) could possibly meet. His theory was that the soul is contained in the pineal gland of the brain, whose function was then mysterious, though today we know it to produce melatonin. 49 Although Descartes’s solution was wrong, he was perfectly right to ask how two totally different kinds of things could ever meet. What, in the end, is contact? This is what the problem of interface means. It is interesting to note that a similar problem arises in a philosopher not often associated with Aristotle: I speak of Henri Bergson in France. Much like Aristotle, he too faces the problem of how the discrete and the continuous could somehow interact. For Bergson, the first term of the duality is inner experience, also known as endured time, or durée, which is qualitative and continuous: in short, the swirling realm of his wife’s cousin, Marcel Proust. 50 The second and opposite term is the realm of what Bergson calls space, characterized as quantifiable and made up of discrete points and discrete entities. For Bergson, the interface between these two opposites takes place along a one-way street. For it is the flowing inner self of durée that must somehow learn to make contact with the discrete and quantifiable outside world. In fact, Bergson gives us three separate terms for 49 50 See René Descartes, The Passions of the Soul. Henri Bergson, Time and Free Will; Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time, 6 vols. 26 �this interface: simultaneity, the second self, and endosmosis. But if there is any case in which the world adapts to us by becoming more smooth and flowing than usual, Bergson does not discuss it, at least not in his debut book Time and Free Will. Speculative Conclusion But now I would like to work towards a conclusion, admittedly a speculative one. One of the valuable points we can take from the Physics and the Metaphysics is that the continuous and the discrete both exist; neither can be reduced to the other. This is why the problem of their point of contact or interface is so important. Two continua cannot make contact, since if they are different from each other in the first place, then they must make contact at some definite, discrete point of intersection. Maybe the easiest way to see this is to return to the correspondence between Clarke and Leibniz, which at least in my time was still on the St. John’s seminar list. 51 Famously, in this correspondence Clarke defends Newton’s conception of time and space as absolute and empty containers. Leibniz responds with good arguments, saying (among other things) that it would make no sense to ask “what if the universe had been created ten minutes earlier?” or “what if the universe were fifty feet further to the west?” Time and space are not absolute and independent, but must be interpreted in terms of the entities that fill them. It may have been a losing proposition in the days of Newtonian hegemony, but following Einstein’s general relativity, and the bending, twisting, and folding of space by mass, Leibniz looks much better now. His point, at any rate, is that continua intersect only by way of the discrete elements that fill them. The unified space-time of Einstein and Minkowski is not a counter-example, since if this unified space-time exists then it is just one continuum, and attempts to link it with another would still require discrete entities in both simultaneously. 51 Samuel Clarke & G.W. Leibniz, Correspondence. 27 �Conversely, I would say that two discrete entities cannot touch directly, but can only meet in a continuous medium. Although it is usually harder to convince people of this second point, I will explain here why it strikes me as inevitable. First, it is worth remembering that a number of thinkers across the centuries have recognized that there is a certain danger in speaking of individual things, since a pure individual would have to be completely cut off from everything else. For two things to be in relation entails that they are not only individuals. In the 1940s the French physicist Louis de Broglie, already a Nobel Prize recipient for demonstrating the wave nature of electrons, noted “how interesting the notion of interaction is, from the philosophical point of view, since it implies a certain limitation on the concept of physical individuality.” 52 Here he is dipping his toes into deep philosophical waters. Unlike de Broglie, there are others who refused to limit the concept of individuality in any way, and it drove them to a delightfully extreme idea: we know it under the name of “occasionalism.” Although this term immediately makes most people think of seventeenth century French Cartesianism, occasionalism actually began in medieval Iraq, through a formerly liberal theologian named Abu Hasan al-Ash‘ari. His idea was that God is not just the only creator, but the only causal agent at all. Fire does not burn cotton; God burns cotton. Along with this challenge to direct causation between worldly beings, al-Ash‘ari also upheld another occasionalist doctrine concerning time. Namely, time is made of discontinuous instants, with the world vanishing and being recreated in every such moment. Most people are more familiar with the European variants of this doctrine in Malebranche, but also in Spinoza, Leibniz, and Berkeley, and again in the twentieth century with Whitehead. Occasionalism is usually rejected, even mocked today, for its apparently extrvagant theological solution to the problem of causation. But I would point out that David Hume and Immanuel Kant are still very much respected mainstream philosophers in our own time, and 52 de Broglie, Continu et discontinu en physique moderne, p. 115. The translation from French is my own. 28 �they simply adopt an occasionalism by other means. Instead of God, the monopoly on causation is given to the human mind instead. But the real solution should not be taxonomical; we should be able to account for causation as being indirect but still local. Yet perhaps you still do not see a problem to be solved. After all, there seems to be no difficulty in shaking someone’s hand, pushing a car when the engine stalls, trains coupling together in a railyard, breakfast cereal touching the sides of its box, touching the roof of your mouth with your tongue, or witnessing inanimate masses that slam together in the asteroid belt. Where’s the supposed problem? Let’s begin by recalling that modern philosophy has been rich in so-called “representationalist” theories of truth, referring to the view that when we open our eyes and look at the world we do not see things, but representations of things. John Locke is one of the most prominent representationalist philosophers, and Richard Rorty one of the best-known antirepresentationalists. 53 The case for representationalism has numerous detractors, though it is rather simple: note that while fire is able to burn forests and cook food, fire as an image in my mind cannot do either of these things. Accordingly, we can think of our relation to the world as an act of translation, one in which we render the forms of the world in terms that are relevant to humans. But dogs also see the world in a doggish way, parrots in a way of their own, and so forth. The result is that no living creature makes direct contact with the world, but only an indirect contact that is distinct to their species, and perhaps even to each animal individually. All that we encounter directly is a representation of reality. The German philosopher Markus Gabriel dismisses this as “interface skepticism.” 54 But many philosophers still defend a representationalist theory, myself included: in my case for the simple reason that a perfect perception or perfect mathematical of fire is not itself a fire. Nor can we say that the difference is simply that real fire exists in something calls “matter,” while John Locke, An Essy Concerning Human Understanding, 2 vols.; Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. 54 Markus Gabriel, Fields of Sense, p. 14. 53 29 �my idea of fire is a “form” extracted from matter. No one has ever seen or encountered such a thing as “matter,” except in the relative sense that clay is a kind of matter for making bricks, though compared with its smaller constituents is form rather than matter. As I see it, the main historical motivation for theories of matter was to create a neutral medium of support in which forms can exist and then be extracted by the mind without alteration. I would propose instead that reality is nothing but forms wrapped in forms, sealed in forms, frozen in forms, and that these forms are always subject to translation when moving from one place to another. In any case, if representationalism is true, then it cannot be limited to creatures with minds. Why not? Because inanimate objects are every bit as finite as humans, even if they are not “conscious” in the way that animals are. The term “finitude” is used by Martin Heidegger in his interpretation of Kant, as a way of defending the view that humans cannot touch reality directly. 55 Let’s consider for a minute why finitude is so important. The ecological philosopher Jakob Johan von Uexküll made a powerful argument that even though all living creatures in a given region share the same surroundings (Umgebung), they do not share the same environment (Umwelt). 56 This differs for each creature, depending on its capacities. His most famous example is the tick, that infamous parasite that falls from trees and sucks the blood of its host; one of them nearly killed my father last year. According to Uexküll, the tick’s entire environment consists of just three factors: first, it senses butyric acid, found in the sweat of mammals, and this causes it to loosen its grip on the tree and fall onto the mammal; second, it uses its sense of heat to find a place on the mammal’s body where blood is close to the surface; third, it uses its sense of touch to bite though the skin and suck the blood of its host. Such limited horizons for this creature! But while humans have a much richer 55 56 Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics. Uexküll, A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans. 30 �existence than this, we are still confined (as in Kant’s philosophy) to perceiving three dimensions of space, a linear and irreversible time, and events that have causes rather than appearing at random. Although many people can be persuaded to accept the theory of finitude in the cases of humans and animals, they tend to recoil in horror if asked to view inanimate things in the same way. Am I claiming that stones and dust have minds? But that’s not the point. The point is that nothing like a “mind” is needed to interact with the world in a finite, limited way. If the tick’s existence seems sadly limited, try to imagine the even sadder state of a flame when encountering a cotton ball. The flame is presumably not “conscious,” yet it still interacts with a very limited range of the cotton ball’s features: namely, the ones that are relevant to the its flammability. In other words, the flame is still finite rather than infinite in its interactions with the world, just like living creatures. It follows that no thing makes direct contact with another thing, but only with a restricted sample of its properties. From this we see that one discrete entity cannot make full direct contact with another; an interface of some sort must be involved. The same is true of the discrete points placed in a continuum, such as the numbers on a number line. We can never specify two numbers that directly touch on the number line, because an infinity of numbers can always be placed between any two given numbers. Since no two discrete entities can ever touch, they must somehow become continuous in order to touch. And here is where the unusual speculations begin. I would say that there are two different ways in which entities become continuous with each other: let’s call them “exterior” and “interior.” The exterior way is the one we usually think of. Two things in the world meet and somehow affect each other, or maybe just one affects the other. I once wrote an article about the grim scenario of a midair collison between two airplanes. 57 The way I interpreted this event was not in the usual way, as a physical impact between two independent pieces of material, but as the temporary unification of 57 Graham Harman, “Time, Space, Essence, and Eidos.” 31 �the two aircraft into a single substance. This new substance then had grave downward causation on its parts before they quickly separated, in new and severely damaged form. Such downward causation (often called “retroactive causation”) has been explored by such philosophers as Manuel DeLanda and Roy Bhaskar. DeLanda speaks of the “mechanisms through which a whole provides its component parts with constraints and resources, placing limitations on what they can do while enabling novel performances.” 58 Bhaskar, for his part, declares that wholes are “capable of acting back on the materials out of which they are formed.” 59 This gives us another reason not to undermine things by dissolving them into their tiniest pieces, since the whole will always haunt the elements of which it was made. We need only consider that Steve Jobs was one of the two original founders who built Apple from the ground up, only to see himself fired by the corporation in 1985. Or think of the way that a bomb (the whole) destroys its components (the parts). Stephen Jay Gould wrote about the constraints with which organisms try to rule their component cells, with cancer marking an unfortunate failure of this process. 60 The point of these discussions of downward causation has been to shift our focus to what happens on the inside of objects I mentioned earlier that Leibniz would become important for us tonight, and that moment has come. For who has ever given a more serious theory than Leibniz, not just of how substances seem from the outside, but of what goes on in their interior where all their perceptions occur. But I am arguing for something a bit different. Let’s say that I perceive a flower. According to the representationalist theory of truth, it is fair to say that we perceive not a flower, but a flower-image. The flower may also encounter some oversimplified version of me, but let’s leave that topic for another occasion. Following the claim about two objects becoming one through causation (however briefly), both the flower and I the observer are parts of a larger object. In cases DeLanda, A New Philosophy of Society, pp. 34-35. See also Graham Harman, “DeLanda’s Ontology.” Roy Bhaskar, A Realist Theory of Science, p. 114. Cited in DeLanda, A New Philosophy of Society, p. 34. 60 Stephen Jay Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, p. 695. 58 59 32 �of hallucination or severe misperception there would be no real flower to which its image correspinds, but this also does not concern us at the moment. In any case, I the observer and the flower-image are both positioned inside the larger object made of us both, as if in the hollow of a tree or the interior of a building. We can call this interior a “sphere” in tribute to the contemporary German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk, who built an entire worldview from the notion of isolated yet interlocking spheres, beginning from the initial mother-child dyad and growing outward from there. 61 Of course, I do not just encounter the image of a flower in this sphere, but the images of many things simultaneously: flower, mountain, dog, sunset; this may or may not be a special feature of living beings, but this topic too must be left for another time. Initially at least, I am just perceiving these images without anything further happening. We might call this interaction it a modus vivendi, in the sense of finding a way to get along with something or someone, pending final resolution of whatever tensions might be present. Along with Sloterdijk’s term “sphere,” we can also borrow the related term “atmosphere” from another German philosopher, the recently deceased Gernot Böhme. (Leibniz, Sloterdijk, Böhme: it’s interesting that so many German names are linked with the interior of entities.) In any case, atmosphere refers to the general ambience of a situation, as opposed to whatever individual things might happen to occupy it. 62 Amidst our modus vivendi with numerous images at any given moment, there is also the more general ambience in which all theae images are bathed. A knife means something very different in such atmospheres as a supermarket deli, a cutlery store, a stage play, or a beach. Our immediate contact is not with the knife-image, but with the atmospheric Peter Sloterdijk, Spheres, 3 vols. His theorization of the mother-child relationship makes it as crucial for philosophy as Melanie Klein (1882-1960) did for psychoanalysis. See Melanie Klein, The Psychoanalysis of Children. 62 Gernot Böhme, The Aesthetics of Atmospheres. 61 33 �continuum that allows me to touch that image in differing ways. 63 Here we find the figure-ground structure of Gestalt pyschology. These opposite terms distinguish between whatever in the visual field grabs our attention and commands our interest (figure), and the more amorphous remainder that does not capture our attention (ground). Stated more simply, it is the experience of architectural interiors, with their dual character as atmosphere and legible surface. What makes this figure-ground structure so important is that I am a discrete entity and the flower-image is a discrete entity, meaning (according to the argument of this lecture) that we should not be able to make contact at all. But all images appear in a more general atmosphere, and this is characterized by its continuity, which serves as the medium for me to perceive the flower. But, as mentioned, our modus vivendi with various images is not just an endpoint, but also a potential beginning. Since we are surrounded by images rather than the things themselves, we seem to be trapped in a world of phantoms; worse yet, these phantoms might even seem to be nothing more than “bundles of qualities” (in Hume’s sense) rather than unified images. 64 In other words, we are usually confined to a literalist world. I take Hume to be the arch-literalist, since literalism is the attitude of taking a thing to be identical with whatever sum total of qualities it possesses. Strictly speaking, if an object changes its qualities even a little bit from one moment to the next, it has become a different object altogether, since the bundle is no longer the same. This was rejected in advance by Aristotle, with his meditation on substance and accident; Socrates and Socrates sitting down are indeed the same substance. But it is seldom recognized that it was also rejected by phenomenology in the twentieth century. Edmund Husserl does not agree at all that an object is a bundle of qualities: quite the contrary, since a thing can show us numerous adumbrations, qualities, See also the related notion of “levels” in Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, p. 114 and Alphonso Lingis, The Imperative, p. 5. 64 David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. 63 34 �or profiles while still remaining one and the same object. 65 Stated differently, both Aristotle and Husserl allow for a dualism of object and quality that Hume could not even consider permitting. But an even better way to de-literalize the world is seen in the case of metaphor, which I take to be of the greatest importance for philosophy. When one thing is metaphorically compared with another, there will of course be some basis in shared qualities, since otherwise we will not compare them. But there’s more to it than that, since the closer the similarity between two things, the less likely there is to be a metaphorical relation between them. For example, during the Cold War NATO used the term “Whiskey Class” to refer to more than 200 Soviet medium multi-purpose submarines. But the stark similarities between all these Soviet watercraft (the use of diesel-electric power, the carrying of four cruise missiles) gives us nothing more than a literal comparison; we are focused on shared bundles of qualities, and solemnly judge that all of the submarines fall under the Whiskey Class rubric. Conversely, if we compare two random objects with few or no shared qualities, we will be too confused to have a metaphorical experience: for example, “a jellyfish is like ten miles of asphalt highway.” Try as we might, it is not very likely that we will be able to mentally perform this strange hybrid being. Yet how different things are with metaphor, omne of my favorite being Homer’s “wine-dark sea.” This cannot be paraphrased as if Homer were saying: “Have you ever noticed that the Mediterranean is the same color as wine?” That paraphrase would perhaps be false, and in any case would be rather boring. Instead, the trivial fact of their similar color is used as a pretext to identify the sea and the wine more generally. We will think of the sea as having a number of other wineproperties: intoxication, danger, and oblivion come to mind, though no metaphor can ever be exhausted by a prose list of similarities between objects. Note as well that unlike literal statements, metaphors are irreversible. We can also say “sea-dark wine,” and this too is a metaphor, but not the 65 Edmund Husserl, Logical Investigations, 2 vols. 35 �same one. In the first case we have a sea with wine-qualities, and in this second case we are speaking of a wine with sea-qualities. In other words, in “wine-dark sea,” the sea is playing the object role, and the wine is playing the qualities role. To strip the qualities away from one object and force them onto another necessarily creates a certain tension. We have a more or less vivid sense of what the qualities of wine are, but no real sense of what a wine-like sea would be, since it is being produced in this metaphor for the very first time. This requires an intense personal effort that is usually foreign to literal statements; this effort draws us into the act of creating a new object in our minds. And since the wine-like sea is so elusive, we step in and perform it ourselves, as if we were a wine trying to shoulder the burden of sea-like qualities. We are like method actors pretending to be a rock, a tree, or a mafia don, with the added complication that we are not just pretending to be the sea, but also a sea with wine-qualities. The mental effort required to compress the various unspecified wine-qualities into the empty form of a masean helps explain the more powerful emotions that result from metaphorical experience than from literal statement: in the metaphor, our entire being is wrapped up in trying to create the wine-dark sea. In the terms of speech act theory, it is a performative experience rather than a constative one: a statement that is not a mere description of fact, but one that implicates me in its consequences. I am no longer the jaded perceiver who places the image of a sea side-by-side with the image of wine. Instead, I have been causally impacted by my performance of the wine-like sea. The literalism of my modus vivendi with images has been replaced with with a new version of me, even if temporarily so. This is the role played by the object/quality polarity that literalism denies. The philosophy of recent centuries has often asked us to conceive of human beings as transcending the world around us, rising above it so as to make critical assessments of the world rather than naively dealing with it. I would say instead that transcendence is the wrong metaphor for what we do. A better one is to say that we are like moles tunneling through the interiors of objects, 36 �and leaving one only so as to enter another. We are more defined by what we take seriously in our modus vivendi than by what we rise above. It may seem like we are now a long way from Aristotle, but it was his great heir Leibniz who drove us more than halfway to where we are now. I now look forward to discussing these matters with you. Thank you. 37 �Bibliography Aristotle. De Anima: Books II and III (With Passages from Book One). trans. D.W. Hamlyn. Oxford: Clarendon, 1993. ——— The Art of Rhetoric, trans. H. Lawson-Tancred. London: Penguin, 1992. ——— Metaphysics, trans. C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2016. Citations are from the Kindle edition. ——— Nicomachean Ethics, trans. T. Irwin. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2019. ——— Physics, trans. C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2018. Citations are from the Kindle edition. Bergson, Henri. Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, trans. F.L. Pogson. Mineola, NY: Dover, 2001. Bhaskar, Roy. A Realist Theory of Science. London: Verso, 1987. Böhme, Gernot. The Aesthetics of Atmosphers, ed. J.-P. Thibaud. London: Routledge, 2016. Braudel, Fernand. Civilization and Capitalism, 15-18th Century, Vol. 1: The Structure of Everyday Life, trans. S. Reynold. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1992. ——— Civilization and Capitalism, 15-18th Century, Vol. 2: The Wheels of Commerce, trans. S. Reynold. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1992. ——— Civilization and Capitalism, 15-18th Century, Vol. 3: The Perspective of the World, trans. S. Reynold. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1992. Cantor, Georg. Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers, trans. P. Jourdain. New York: Cosimo, 2007. Clarke, Samuel & G.W. Leibniz. Correspondence, ed. R. Ariew. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2000. de Broglie, Louis. Continu et discontinu en physique moderne. Paris: Albin Michel, 1941. DeLanda, Manuel. “Emergence, Causality and Realism,” in L. Bryant, N. Srnicek, & G. Harman, eds. The Speculative Turn: Continental Materialism and Realism, pp. 381-392. Melbourne: re.press, 2011. ——— A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum, 2006. Deleuze, Gilles. The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque, trans. T. Conley. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992. Descartes, René. The Passions of the Soul, trans. S. Voss. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989. Eldredge, Niles & Stephen Jay Gould. “Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism,” in Models in Paleobiology, ed. T.M. Schopf, pp. 82-115. San Francisco: Freeman Cooper, 1972. 38 �Euclid. The Thirteen Books of the Elements, trans. T. Heath. New York: Dover, 1956. Gabriel, Markus. Fields of Sense: A New Realist Ontology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Press, 2015. Gibbon, Edward. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 3 vols., trans. D. Womersley. London: Penguin, 1996. Gould, Stephen Jay. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2002. Harman, Graham. “DeLanda’s Ontology: Assemblage and Realism,” Continental Philosophy Review 41:3 (2008), pp. 367-383. ——— Prince of Networks: Bruno Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne: re.press, 2009. ——— “Time, Space, Essence, and Eidos: A New Theory of Causation,” Cosmos and History 6.1 (2010), pp. 1-17. ——— “Undermining, Overmining, and Duomining: A Critique,” in ADD Metaphysics, Jenna Sutela, ed., pp. 40-51. Aalto, Finland: Aalto University Design Research Laboratory, 2013. Hartmann, Nicolai. “The Megarian and the Aristotelian Concept of Possibility: A Contribution to the History of the Ontological Problem of Modality,” trans. F. Tremblay & K. Peterson, Axiomathes 27 (2017), pp. 209-223. Heidegger, Martin. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 5th Edition, Enlarged, trans. R. Taft. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1997. Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1993. Husserl, Edmund. Logical Investigations, 2 vols., trans. J.N. Findlay. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970. Johnson, Philip & Wark Wigley. Deconstructivist Architecture. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1988. Klein, Melanie. The Psychoanalysis of Children, trans. A. Strachey. New York: Vintage, 1997. Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 50th Anniversary Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012. Latour, Bruno. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999. ——— Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Leibniz, G.W. Philosophical Essays, trans. R. Ariew & D. Garber. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989. ——— Theodicy: Essays on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man, and the Origin of Evil, trans. E.M. Huggard. Chicago: Open Court, 1996. Lingis, Alphonso. The Imperative. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998. 39 �Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 2 vols. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1959. Margulis, Lynn. Symbiotic Planet: A New Look at Evolution. New York: Basic Books, 1999. Marías, Julián. History of Philosophy, trans. S. Appelbaum & C. Strowbridge. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1967. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. The Visible and the Invisible, trans. A. Lingis. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1998. Nail, Thomas. Being in Motion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. ——— “Is Nature Continuous or Discrete? How the Atomist Error Was Born,” Aeon, May 18, 2018. <https://aeon.co/ideas/is-nature-continuous-or-discrete-how-the-atomist-error-wasborn>. Last accessed on March 1, 2024. Proust, Marcel. In Search of Lost Time, 6 vols., trans. D.J. Enright & C.K.S. Moncrieff. New York: Modern Library, 2003. Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Unviersity Press, 1981. Russell, Bertrand. History of Western Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2009. Sloterdijk, Peter. Spheres, Vol. I: Bubbles, trans. W. Hoban. New York: Semiotext(e), 2011. ——— Spheres, Vol. II: Globes, trans. W. Hoban. New York: Semiotext(e), 2014. ——— Spheres, Vol. III: Foam, trans. W. Hoban. New York: Semiotext(e), 2016. Uexküll, Jakob von. A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans with A Theory of Meaning, trans. J.D. O’Neil. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 2010. van Inwagen, Peter, Meghan Sullivan, & Sara Bernstein. “Metaphysics,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2023 Edition), E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman, eds. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2023/entries/metaphysics/>. Whitehead, Alfred North. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. New York: The Free Press, 1978. Young, Niki. “Object, Reduction, and Emergence: An Object-Oriented View,” Open Philosophy 4 (2021), pp. 83-93. Zeller, Eduard. Outlines of the History of Ancient Philosophy, trans. S.F. Alleyne & E. Abbott. Mineola, NY: Dover, 1980. 40 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 40 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Footnotes to Aristotle Description An account of the resource Typescript of a lecture delivered on September 13, 2024, by Graham Harman as part of the Formal Lecture Series. Professor Harman is an alum of the Annapolis campus of St. John's. He is currently a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and the Liberal Arts Co-Ordinator at the Southern California Institute of Architecture, with teaching stops around the world focused on philosophical thinking, architecture, and art. He has repeatedly been included on ArtReview’s Power 100 list of the most influential figures in the contemporary art world. Dr. Harman gives the following description of his lecture: "The title of this lecture is a riff on Alfred North Whitehead's famous remark that Western philosophy can be considered as a series of footnotes to Plato. The lecture will interpret the difference between Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics as a difference between the continuous and the discrete, and will seek to develop further Aristotle's notion of "contact" as how two things meet (thereby bridging the gap between the continuous and the discrete)." Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Harman, Graham, 1968- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-09-13 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission to: Make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make an audio recording of my lecture available online. Make a typescript copy of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make a copy of my typescript available online." Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource Aristotle. Physics. Aristotle. Metaphysics. Philosophy Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Harman_Graham_2024-09-13 Relation A related resource <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/show/7977">Video</a> Alumni Friday night lecture Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Hyperlink A link, or reference, to another resource on the Internet. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data mov Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:49:43 URL https://youtu.be/ZDL2_UzYup4?si=6FuJucfv1oAxOri3 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <a href="https://youtu.be/ZDL2_UzYup4?si=6FuJucfv1oAxOri3">Pursuing the Tiniest Bits of Matter: The Legacy of Democritus from Quarks to Cancer</a> Description An account of the resource Video recording of a lecture delivered on October 18, 2024, by Cynthia Keppel as part of the Formal Lecture Series.  <br /><br /> <div> <div>Dr.<span> </span><span class="markizagi5dmw">Keppel</span>, a St. John's Annapolis alum, leads the Physics Division at Jefferson Labs, where she and her colleagues study the structure and dynamics of the fundamental building blocks of matter. She is both a nuclear physicist and a cancer researcher, with numerous patents and scientific publications across both fields. </div> <div> </div> <div>Dr.<span> </span><span class="markizagi5dmw">Keppel</span><span> </span>offers the following description of her lecture: "Humans for ages have pondered the question 'what is everything made of?' I will discuss why physicists have for centuries been interested in this question and pursue understanding of the tiniest particles known to humankind, and how an understanding of these particles continues to advance a breadth of human knowledge and endeavor."</div> </div> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Keppel, C. (Cynthia), 1962- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-18 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Type The nature or genre of the resource YouTube video Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp4 Subject The topic of the resource Atomism Matter Democritus, approximately 460 B.C.-approximately 370 B.C. Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Keppel_Cynthia_2024-10-18_ac Alumni Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/7e49dffe8bcaf732df79ede319512000.mp4 2f34209fda31748f510d7178672d2c1b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Moving Image A series of visual representations imparting an impression of motion when shown in succession. Examples include animations, movies, television programs, videos, zoetropes, or visual output from a simulation. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data wav Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:59:49 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Philosophical Challenge of Early Art Description An account of the resource Video recording of a lecture delivered on November 8, 2024, by Allen Speight as part of the Formal Lecture Series.  <br /><br /> <div>Professor<span> </span><span class="markoxbyg8qa4">Speight</span><span> </span>(SJC Annapolis, 1984) is Professor of Philosophy and Director of Graduate Admissions at Boston University, with a teaching focus on the philosophy of art and culture. Alongside his interest in early art, he has written extensively on Hegel and German Ideology, and is a previous Fullbright Professor of Leuphana Universität Lüneburg in Germany. His most recent book was as co-editor and contributor on<span> </span><i>Goethe’s Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship and Philosophy<span> </span></i>(2020).</div> <div> </div> <div>Professor<span> </span><span class="markoxbyg8qa4">Speight</span><span> </span>offers this introduction to his lecture: "Since the modern discovery of Paleolithic cave art in 1879, scholars have pondered its origin and significance. The remarkable paintings and etchings that line the walls of caves at Altamira, Lascaux and Chauvet and hundreds of other sites around the world prompt both wonder and reflection: what can images produced tens of thousands of years ago tell us about the nature of human making and our responses to it? This lecture will explore a range of philosophical questions posed by early art, including the nature of mimesis, the roles of sight and touch, and the relation between symbol and figurative art."</div> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Speight, Allen Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-08 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Type The nature or genre of the resource moving image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp4 Subject The topic of the resource Art, Prehistoric Rock paintings Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Speight_Allen_2024-11-08_ac Alumni Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/441ed53c308a67d455ac90da286577d3.pdf 675a1025b70141d87c4dc16b8388ad85 PDF Text Text The Erotic Theme in Thucydides' Peloponnesian War Paul Ludwig Lecture presented at St. John's College, Annapolis December 5, 2003 Thucydides' account of the war between the Athenians and Peloponnesians is unromantic. There are a couple of places in the history where matters having to do with love-or at least sex-pop up. For reasons he leaves us to figure out, Thucydides thinks it very important that-near the peak of their civilization's development-the Greeks started to exercise naked, while the barbarians never did. \Vhen we imagine how strange it would be to go jogging with no visible means of support, or to wrestle, doing takedowns and throws and half-nelsons in the buff, we can agree with Thucydides that such behavior is at least distinctive. In addition to this brief encounter with Greek nudity, the history describes in detail one person-to-person love affair: the story of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, the legendary founders of the democracy at Athens, a daring couple that slew the tyrant. Thucydides debunks this founding myth. A very widespread interpretation would have it that the way Thucydides debunks Harmodius and Aristogeiton is by exposing their erotic relationship; that is, he reveals that their tyrannicide was motivated not by a public desire for liberty but by a private, personal, perhaps even tawdry, love affair. I'm going to argue against this interpretation, but it seems to be too many readers' first take. The short refutation is that the Athenians already knew that Harmodius and Aristogeiton were lovers. (So the alleged expose was not news to anyone.) The Athenians seem not to have denigrated but celebrated the fact that their love broke out of the private realm and spilled over into public affairs. Apparently, love wasn't supposed to be merely private at all-and this idea might fit together with their public nudity. The very greatest exponent of the most highly sophisticated version of a public love affair is Pericles himself in the Funeral Oration: Pericles exhorts each citizen to carry on an erotic affair with the city of Athens. And starting with Pericles, I will try to 1 �show tonight that the theme of eros is a thread running throughout much of the history. And that if you pull at this thread tenaciously enough, eros opens up Thucydides' work like only a few other themes can, and the history yields up some of its riches. Pericles in the Funeral Oration is making the case that the citizen-soldiers who risked (and lost) their lives for Athens made the right choice. It is for the living to be dedicated to the same spirit, albeit they may pray for a safer outcome for themselves. Eros is going to be his key to making this case. (In the following passage I have broken a couple of the lines like poetry to show a rhetorical parallelism; there is no line break in the original). Do not in word alone inspect the profit-which anyone could expound at length to you who know it yourselves no worse than he, telling how many good things depend upon defense against enemies, but rather, actively contemplate [theomenoi] the power of the city, day after day, and become lovers [erastai] of it [the power or: "of her," Athens], and when she seems great to you, take it to heart that daring men, men who knew what was needful, and who, in their actions, were sensible of dishonor, acquired these things; and if they ever failed in an attempt, they deemed it unworthy to deprive the city of their excellence, but gave themselves away as their finest favor to her. (2.43.1) Inspecting profit or benefits-what your country can do for you-remains on the level of calculation; profit could never inspire a citizen to lay down his life. A disinterested contemplation of the power of the city and her grandeur evoke an emotion very different from the ordinary human desire for gain. Contemplation evokes eros and tum the citizens into lovers, erastai-the same word Plato will use in the Symposium and other dialogues to mean men who fall in love with boys and trail around after their beloveds hoping to get a smile or a wave, some token or sign that the beloveds acknowledge their existence. What Pericles means by "lovers" is not merely citizens who feel love or eros toward an unusual object-a city. Rather, he's asking them, on the basis of this unusual eros that they will feel, to play, in relation to the city, the social role that lovers play toward a beloved. They are to serve her chivalrously, sacrifice for her, perhaps die on her behalf (the way Greek lovers fighting side 2 �by side sometimes died for one another), and, in this game of courtship, compete for her favors, and rival one another to show her which of her lovers is the most worthy. Neither of the two motivations mentioned, profit or eros, which are on such vastly different levels, asks the citizen to make an unself-interested or altruistic sacrifice, as for example an appeal to duty might have done. Instead, the last word in the passage, favoreranos or contribution, is a service done in hopes of a return. Few cavaliers rescue the damsel in distress out of sheer philanthropy: they want their virtue noticed, they want to be rewarded handsomely, perhaps even to be loved back: they want at least a kiss on the cheek. So what do Pericles' citizen-soldiers get in return? Pericles almost implies that, at the highest level of this sort of love, the pleasure of contemplating Athens might suffice. Love is enough. But his explicit statement of what citizen-soldiers get in return is honors bestowed on them by the city. The dead, he says, "won praise which never grows old" (2.43.2). That the lover of Athens gets something out of it, namely honor, is important because this unusual form of patriotism that Pericles envisions, this civic passion of eros, has to compete against, and win out over, the other desire he mentioned, the desire for profit or gain, as well as other common, low, or merely selfish desires. An important word in Greek for low, selfish attachments generally is oikeion or oikeia: "one's own." The word is related to the words for house and home, and often means private matters as contrasted with public affairs. [Our leaders] have a care for their own private matters [oikeia] at the same time as political affairs, while the rest, people with permanent jobs, have no small understanding of politics. And the man who refuses to participate in politics? We alone [among the Greeks] do not consider him to be minding his own business but rather to be simply useless. (2.40.2) Pericles assumes a distinction between the few and the many, a distinction that Athenian democracy may have transcended. The normal assumption is that wealthy statesmen, who do not have to work for a living (they don't have "permanent jobs"), neglect their own (ta oikeia), that is, their homes and families, in favor of the public good. Ordinary folk, on the 3 �other hand, are assumed to be too self-centered and intent on private gain to care much about, or sacrifice much for, the common weal. Pericles characterizes Athenian democracy as breaking down this distinction, since all have a share in ruling. The many, who are not independently wealthy and for whom private gain is therefore a major concern, are expected to break out of their selfishness and participate politically. The key to doing that is not grimly to undertake to fulfill their patriotic duty, but rather to open themselves to the experience of a kind of patriotism that is a falling-in-love, and which is intended to be a joy. Achieving this higher love does not mean suppressing the lower desires. That is how the Spartans regard duty to country. At Sparta, someone is always watching you. Male Spartans rarely retreat behind closed doors to see their own families because they sleep in a kind of men's club. The amount of private property they are supposed to own is fixed. With Spartans being in many respects deprived of the private, the city is all that they have left. Athens reverses all this. Pericles' chief claim is that laws suppressing the private are unnecessary for Athenians, who, unlike the Spartans, can be trusted with a wide freedom in their private lives (2.37.2-3) and yet will still, when the time comes, freely and willingly risk their own for the common good (2.39.4). Athens therefore achieves the same (or better) civic sacrifices as Sparta does, but at less cost to her citizens' humanity (2.39.1). Pericles says that Athenians can be trusted with acquisitiveness not only in their desire for beautiful things and in their pursuit of wisdom, but even in pursuing wealth itself (2.40.1). Athenians know how to keep wealth in its place: money has no political significance because voting rights are not restricted to wealthy property-owners (2.3 7.1 ). The poor in Athens are not prevented from working their way out of poverty; indeed, they are positively shamed into doing so (2.40.1). Where Spartans are taught how to endure pain, the Athenians substitute the freedom to act in accordance with pleasure (2.37.2). Only the self-sacrifice of people who have something to give up, who have "a clear knowledge of the pleasures" that they risk losing, is truly admirable (2.40.3). For a Spartan to embrace pain merely because he has never been allowed to experience anything better is not real courage. 4 �Why can the Athenians be trusted with pleasures and with acquisitiveness? Because they are acquisitive of a higher pleasure: The love of honor [to philotimon] alone never grows old, and the better enjoyment ... is not material gain as some say, but receiving honor (to timasthai, 2.44.4). In the cases of the ones who died, specifically the enjoyment of riches and the hope of enriching themselves later in life did not stand in the way ofrisking their lives now (2.42.4). This was not because wealth is not a good, but because honor is a greater good. Moderating the lower desires does not mean suppressing them but rather allowing a higher desire to override the lower ones. Can this Athenian freedom to follow one's heart truly permit the higher love-object, the city, to lure Athenians away from the attachment to their own? According to Pericles, the answer is Yes: freedom has been quite effective at enabling ordinary Athenians to see that "their own" is not the highest good. Here it might help to introduce another term, the opposite of oikeion-the allotrion, meaning the alien, not one's own, but the other's. Pericles shows how Athenians are better fighters than other Greeks are with (I think) less exaggeration than might first appear. Pericles assumes that the general run of humanity all fight harder in defense of their own home soil than they fight on foreign soil, when they come as invaders in someone else's land. The peculiar virtue of Athenians, according to Pericles, is that ... invading the [land] of our neighbors we fight without difficulty on alien ground [en tei allotriai] against men who are defending themselves in the midst of their own fperi ton oikeion] and for the most part we conquer. (2.39.2) In their fighting, at least, the Athenians have overcome the distinction between home and abroad, between "one's own" and "the other's." Nor is this distinction erased only in their fighting. Look what Pericles says about the foreign goods and foreign commodities that come into the Athenian marketplace, the hub of a vast naval empire: 5 �On account of the stature of our city, all things come into her from every land; whence it happens that for us, reaping the goods produced here is no more familiar [oikeiotera, "no more our own"] an enjoyment than reaping those of other people. (2.38.3) Athenians love foreign goods, and perhaps even foreign fashions, at least as much as they love their own. This brings up a distinction between two senses of the oikeion, one's own. Earlier, we saw how private individuals were supposed to allow the love of the community to override their attachment to their own. We now seem to be talking about Athenians allowing what is good but foreign to override (or at least to take a place in their hearts equal to) their love for Athenian goods. As the individual is one among many in the community, so the community is one among many in the world. In the first sense of oikeion, a higher entity (Athens) overrides individual "ownness." In this second sense of oikeion, a yet higher entity (the whole world) overrides Athenian "ownness"-overrides Athenianness. Perhaps Athenianness will henceforth mean universality. Iif so, that would fit together with Greek public nudity againwearing no clothes, shedding all that is not natural, letting go of all that is merely customary, local, or parochial. For Athens to become universal, to embrace the whole world, could occur in at least two different ways. First, Athens could try to take over the world. It is true that the patriotism Pericles envisions goes hand in hand with imperialism. To be worthy of winning the kind of love the citizens are supposed to feel for her, Athens is practically compelled to go forth and struggle with other cities to prove that she is the fairest of them all. One of the clearest statements of this imperialism is we have forced every sea and land to become the highway of our daring, and everywhere we have set up eternal [aidia] monuments to both good and evil. (2.41.4) The etemality of the monuments means that after Athens is gone, people will still be talking about Athenians, just as we are still talking about them tonight. Thus the honor that Athens 6 �wins for her citizens goes beyond locally-conferred honor; it has an international aspect and expands to encompass honors from all over the world. For the whole world is the tomb of illustrious men, and not only does the epitaph on gravestones signal it in their own land [en tei oikeiai]; but also, in lands not belonging to them, there dwells an unwritten marker in every mind if not in fact. (2.43.2-3) But this imperial way of becoming universal would seem to be at odds with becoming truly universal. Imperialism might mean imposing one set oflocal or parochial customs on the whole world. A belligerent imperialism would make the rest of the world like Athens. An alternative way of becoming universal would make Athens like the rest of the world. This second way was just barely suggested by Pericles' boast that reaping Athenian goods was an experience no more "their own" than reaping other people's goods. It was a hint that Athenians might be desirous of bringing the rest of the world to Athens rather than bringing Athenianness to the rest of the world. In any case, it now appears that letting a higher desire override a lower desire involves a principle that could set in motion a process the end of which would be difficult to predict. It is one thing if our love for our community overrides the love of our "own." It is quite another thing if some love for a yet higher entity overrides our love for our community, for that would seem to entail a loss or weakening of our patriotism. But inspiring a more intelligent patriotism that would unlock the true sources of patriotic service was the main point of the Funeral Oration; awakening patriotic service was the whole point of making patriotism erotic, the whole point of placing love of country on this sliding scale of loves-of higher loves that override lower loves-in the first place. So if a love higher than patriotism is now overriding patriotism, we may have to raise questions about what Pericles thinks he is doing in the Funeral Oration. The thread we have been following about eros and the oikeion, one's own, silently connects the book 2 Funeral Oration with a book 1 speech delivered by the Corinthians at the Peloponnesian congress. At this congress, the Corinthians try to convince Sparta to declare 7 �war on Athens. The Corinthians give voice to one of the questions we have been pursuing: just how effective the freedom to follow one's heart has been at overcoming the distinction between "one's own" and "the other's," between home and abroad, in the Athenian mind. Very effective, the Corinthians say, and strange and dangerous too. The Corinthians characterize the Athenians in the following way: In their city's behalf, they treat their bodies as if completely alienated from them [allotriotata]. And on deeds in her behalf they use their intellect, though it is their ownmost [oikeiotate]. (1.70.6) The Corinthians are astonished by the Athenians' reversal of all ordinary assumptions. Body is the Corinthians' definition of an individual's "own." The body is the only possession that cannot be given away or alienated without also destroying the individual himself. Yet Athenians behave as if bodies were held in common. The Corinthians are also astonished by the fact that Athenians regard their minds as their "ownmost." Mind can be made to conform with the common: minds can all register the same idea at the same time; hence the success of the mind control exercised at Sparta. Athenians, by contrast, are allowed the freedom to exercise their own minds to the fullest extent, and yet somehow their minds still tum back to the public good ("They use their intellect on deeds in her behalf, even though it is their ownmost"). In both body and mind, the Athenians treat their own as if it were everyone else's. But this reversal of expectations about one's own and the other's link up with the imperial foreign policy we were discussing before. Just as, domestically or vis-a-vis fellow citizens, the Athenians treat their own as if it were everyone else's, so in their imperial policies do they have the disconcerting habit of considering other people's property their own before they have even taken it: When they fail to prosecute their schemes, they feel deprived of what is their own [oikeia]. But when they do invade and acquire something, they regard it a small deed compared with things to come. . . . For them alone, hoping and having are the same .... (1.70.7, emphasis added) 8 �The match-up between Sparta and Athens, say the Corinthians, is one between stick-at-homes and people who essentially live abroad (apodemetai, 1.70.4). Apparently, the Spartans see only their own. The Athenians have lost the exclusivity of that attachment to what was originally their own; they now see the whole earth as their own. This erotic patriotism that we learn about in the Funeral Oration, this courtship style of citizenship, undergoes an implicit critique in the remainder of the history. I stress implicit because the fault is nowhere attributed to Pericles. Thucydides' explicit judgment of Pericles is very high praise, and it might be said that Pericles' management of affairs was better, more prudent, than his own Funeral Oration. But as we'll see, there is a point-by-point conformality in later events (especially the events surrounding the Sicilian expedition) that all look back to the Funeral Oration as the place in the history where erotic citizenship first becomes aware of itself or first becomes a consciously-chosen project. Between the book 2 Funeral Oration and the book 6 Sicilian expedition, there intervene at least two major places where the erotic thread becomes discernible, and while we do not have adequate time to spend on them, it would be remiss not to look briefly at one of the great speeches in the history, by the otherwise unknown orator Diodotus in the debate over the fate of the Mytilenians, who had rebelled against the Empire. Diodotus' opponent is Cleon, one of the leading politicians after Pericles' death, one of those politicians of whom Thucydides says, in his eulogy of Pericles, that they were more on a level with one another, and therefore had to cater to the pleasures of the people in order to stay in power. In this debate, Cleon is in favor of massacring the entire adult male population of the rebel city Mytilene and selling the women and children into slavery. Diodotus is arguing against this genocide. Forget about justice, Diodotus says in effect, all is fair in love: the Mytilenians rebelled because they were acting under the influence of an erotic passion for liberty. Capital punishment in such a case is ineffectual, he says, because greater forces are at work in human nature than any rational deterrent. "It is absolutely impossible-and the mark of great 9 �simplemindedness to think-that there is any hindering, whether by strength of laws or other fear, human nature rushing eagerly to commit an act." Men are driven to take risks because they are mastered by something ineradicable (or "incurable"). And what masters them is hope and eros everywhere, the latter leading, the former following on-[eros] conceiving the plot, [hope] guaranteeing the resources for a good fortune--do the greatest harm and, though invisible themselves, are stronger than visible terrors. And fortune in addition to these contributes no less to the excitement: unlooked-for, she is there, leading men on to gamble with inferior means, and this is no less the case with cities, in proportion as they concern the greatest things: freedom and empire .... (3.45.5-6) If we are to believe Diodotus, eros is more widespread in political affairs than we imagined. Athens with her erotic citizenship would only be making use of---or arousing-erotic passions that could be awakened in any city to a greater or lesser degree. Just as individuals under the influence of eros will gamble their livelihood and sometimes their lives, entire cities are now said to experience a communal erotic passion, and cities will gamble everything, risking even the political annihilation Cleon has in store for them, when faced with the greatest temptations. The great prospect of winning their freedom tempts the Mytilenians to gamble. The other great temptation is said to be the prospect of ruling over other cities as an imperial power. It is difficult not to apply Diodotus' concept of eros to the temptation which the Athenians themselves will later undergo: the temptation to increase their empire by undertaking the Sicilian expedition. In the seventeenth year of a war in which they were having trouble holding on to the empire they already possessed, the Athenians begin to debate whether to sail against Syracuse in Sicily in order to win a whole new empire. This was precisely the kind of new acquisition that Pericles had warned them against: his strategy was, don't do anything foolish, Athens will easily outlast Sparta in this war. But we will have to consider whether Pericles' warning was 10 �not unrealistic in view of the erotic passion that Pericles had made use of-or perhaps aroused-in the Athenians. It could be argued that eros was a cat let out of the bag, something which must take its course whether Pericles was around or not, while the success of Pericles' conservative strategy and his warning were dependent on Pericles' being around. But Pericles died of the plague just two and a half years into the war. The debate over the Sicilian expedition pits the conservative Nicias against the flamboyant, young, beautiful and imperialistic relative of Pericles: Alcibiades. Nicias warns the older Athenians that their young men, meaning young men like Alcibiades, are infected by eros, or rather by dyserotes: dysfunctional or "sick" loves for (as he says) far-away things (6.13.1). To his way oflooking at it, the young Athenians no longer love their own; they love places and things that are far away. But when Alcibiades and the pro-expedition side seem to be getting the better of the debate, Nicias reverses course and pretends to support the mission. He hopes to dissuade the assembly by staggering them with the immense cost needed to equip his vision of a vast, unsinkable armada (6.24.1-2; cf. 6.21-3). Contrary to his intention, however, contemplating that vision of their own military might awakens the desire to use it (cf. 6.31.1 ). This is the moment when it happens: Eros fell upon all alike to sail forth. [It fell] upon the elders, [who thought] that either they would subdue whatever they sailed against or that a great force would in no way be overthrown. [It fell] upon the young men through a longing for far-away sights and spectacles [ops is kai theoria], being of good hope, as they were, of corning back safe. And the great multitude and the soldier intended to earn money, in the short run, and besides that to acquire power whence wages might accrue to them eternally [aidion]. (6.24.3) This passage brings together, into a coherent whole, many of the things said earlier about eros by Nicias, Diodotus, and Pericles. First, just as Nicias said shortly before, the young men do indeed fall in love with far-away things, not with their own country. Second, Thucydides notices an optical or contemplative aspect: opsis and theoria. This contemplative eros, their desire to look at Sicily, corresponds to Pericles' exhortation to gaze at (theomenoi) or 11 �contemplate their own city. Third, the "good hope" or hopefulness following close on after eros, answers to Diodotus' description: eros leading, hope following on. The Corinthians, too, although they did not know they were talking about eros, remarked this hopeful character of the Athenians: hoping and having are the same to them. Fourth (and a great deal turns on this interpretation), the eternal wages seem to answer ironically Pericles' Funeral Oration: what was supposed to be a desire for eternal (aidia) monuments becomes a desire for eternal (aidion) gain. The gain or profit that eros was supposed to override now becomes one of the main motives in the erotic Athenian policy toward Sicily. Whether or not these echoes are deliberate, this passage seems to contain the outcome of Pericles' project. The liberation of acquisitiveness did not permit all Athenians to raise their sights; it did not enable them to seek to acquire higher things. The mass of people never liberated themselves from the desire for material gain. Now, there are three classes mentioned in the passage: the old, the young, and the multitude. I'm going to skip the old men: they are concerned primarily with security; interpreting their eros is complicated and depends on a close reading of the speeches in the debate. Perhaps we will have time for the old men in the question period. I'm going to treat the young and the multitude one at a time. First, the multitude. Not the higher love of a beautiful Athens, but what Athens can do for them, motivates the majority of Athenians. Not only can they not leave profit and their own behind for a higher love of Athens, but profit is their number one concern. Each intends to use Athens' military might to ensure his own source of income in perpetuity. Private gain, as opposed to the common good, is leading Athens on a fatal path. We recall that the ordinary distinction between the honor-loving few and the gain-loving many was a distinction that Athenian democracy was supposed to have transcended. Pericles had implied that honor was the higher pleasure not only for the elites but for every Athenian. Probably the wealthy elites of Athens did indeed desire honors more than profit. Since the elites were wealthy already, they could afford to seek honors rather than profits. Thucydides' judgment on how the war was lost singles out these two culprits, profits and honor, and he seems to divide again the classes that 12 �Pericles had united. Thucydides writes that the Athenians conducted their policies in accordance with "private honor-loving and private gain" (2.65.7). There was of course a notable example of a wealthy man who was motivated by both of these desires, and that was Alcibiades, who needed both money and reputation, the money to support the reputation (6.15.2-3). But conducting war for private monetary gain is the special contribution of the masses to Athens' fall. But a single group of Athenians, the elite young men of the officer class (officers because the passage distinguishes them as a separate social and economic group from the great multitude and the soldier) did indeed achieve a contemplative eros worthy of, if not identical to, what Pericles had envisioned. Thucydides does not describe the eros of the elite young men, at this crucial moment of the Sicilian expedition, as a desire for honor or selfglorification, despite that most notable exception among them: the honor-loving Alcibiades. Instead, he records the peculiarly open, militarily useless motive of sight-seeing. They desired to see "far-off sights and spectacles." The word that Thucydides chooses to describe the young men's passion to see, theoria, properly means a "spectator event," including theatrical performances, religious processions, and games such as the Olympics. Observing these events in an official capacity at state expense was one of the perquisites of being Greek, of ruling an empire, and of being upper-class. If a citizen was on a theoria, he was on a junket, getting paid to travel to foreign lands and see places and sights that he had always wanted to see, in addition to being wined and dined by the locals. The odd thing about the young Athenians' being overcome by this desire now, on the eve of the Sicilian expedition, is that theoria is a mission undertaken in time of peace. In the deadly struggle that awaits the young men, there will be no leisure to look. Their detachment from reality is a dangerous delusion about how amenable the world is to their own desires, a delusion at once characteristic of an erotic fantasy, and worse than useless in practical politics. The beguiled young men, for their own safety, ought to have been feeling sterner emotions as they sailed off to Sicily, from which few out of many ever returned. Anger at an injustice or fear for the safety of their own homeland 13 �would have served them better. Even acquisitiveness, which the many felt, would have stood them in better stead for the rigors to come. A near total lack of selfishness characterizes this eros, in which beautiful sights take precedence over acquisition and replace even the desire to win glory. Pericles had recognized the generosity inherent in contemplation, and he had hoped to harness it to civic ends, but in the event the contemplative eros proves difficult to harness. Now one might get the impression from this that Thucydides disagreed with Pericles about eros, either on practical or theoretical grounds. For example, Thucydides may have thought that a concept of citizenship in which eros was unleashed was wrong on moral or even religious grounds. It has, in fact, often been pointed out that Thucydides ends his Melian narrative where his Sicilian narrative begins, even though chronology would not have made such a close connection necessary. The Melian dialogue and its narrative show Athenian imperialism at its very worst, ruthlessly crushing the small island nation of Melos, and committing against its population the genocide that Diodotus' speech had narrowly averted from the Mytilenians more than a decade earlier. Perhaps Thucydides made the Sicilian narrative follow closely upon the Melian narrative in order to show that eros, like pride, goeth before a fall. Eros, like Ate (madness or ruin) was traditionally one of the attendant daemons of divine justice, sent from heaven to mix up the minds of those whom the gods would destroy. Although Thucydides has, up till now, merely reported the use of the word eros in other people's political rhetoric, having waited till this critical juncture, he now uses eras in his own name, to describe the moment in Athenian politics when their imperialism finally overreached and laid itself open to a crippling blow. The hubris that it would not have been difficult for his readership to discern in the speeches and deeds of the Athenians on the island of Melos is followed close on by the infatuation of the Athenian public for a much larger island and one not so defenseless. This "tragic" depiction of eros might have been all that Thucydides intended, if the unfinished history had broken off after the loss of the Sicilian expedition. The story would have been as simple as: "hubris punished." Instead, the history 14 �continues on for another book; the Athenians rebound from their loss and gamely battle on, displaying many of the admirable (if also questionable) character traits they also showed before and during the Sicilian expedition. So while Thucydides shows the potential destructiveness of political eros, he nevertheless does not portray its consequences as being precisely tragic. But perhaps Thucydides is critical of erotic patriotism in some other way; perhaps Thucydides disagreed with Pericles over what eros is and what its power is. This hypothesis contains more than a grain of truth, in my estimation. For example, Thucydides' stress on the private selfishness of the multitude and on the soft, impractical sight-seeing of the elite young men would seem to mean that he thought erotic patriotism-citizenship-as-courtship-was problematic or vitiated in ways that Pericles did not perceive. Nevertheless, the view of eras that emerges from the Funeral Oration, and the view of eros that emerges from the history as a whole, share remarkable similarities which overshadow their differences. The criticism implicit in the current passage should not be understood to mean that Thucydides simply dismissed erotic patriotism as an ill-conceived rhetorical flourish, appropriate for a Funeral Oration but lacking practical consequences in real politics. On the contrary, Thucydides carefully catalogues, with a kind of awe, how the Athenians engaged, to all appearances, in just such courtship behavior as Pericles had intended. In their preparation for the Sicilian expedition, in the period following the fatal debates, the Athenians engage in an extraordinary allocation of resources, an almost thoughtless generosity or liberality of expenditure (6.31.15), and total commitment to the task, all of which have the distinct character of an erotic courtship, or wooing, of Athens. What follows is a paraphrase. The entire city went down to the Peiraeus on the day of departure. The immensity of what they were about to undertake struck them more fully at the last minute, but they took courage when they saw the sheer magnitude of their armed might. Foreigners, and the rest of the crowd who were not going, came for the spectacle, which was at once worthy of description and so incredible as to be beyond the mind's capacity to grasp it. The armada was 15 �the most expensive and splendid ever to come into existence up to that time (of those from a single city and with Hellenic forces; 6.30.1-6.31.1). Costly figureheads and furnishings were used in the ships. Each man outfitting a trireme exerted himself to the last degree to make his ship excel the others in splendor and speed. Among the land forces, a zealous contestation, one against the other broke out over arms and bodily apparel. Strife among themselves was raised wherever any of them were posted; and it seemed, to the rest of the Hellenes, more in the likeness of an exhibition of power and wealth than a preparation against enemies (6.31.34). Once the fleet had sailed out, the ships raced one another as far as Aegina (6.32.2). This intense rivalry, to the extent of preening themselves on the beauty of their equipment and their apparel, and fighting over such items, perhaps more than any other single feature resembles the actions of rival lovers vying for the hand of a beloved. One thinks of the behavior of peacocks and the altercations of bachelor males of many species during the mating season. To all appearances, and like the suitors whom Pericles exhorted them to become, the Athenians pay their court to the city Athens, wooing her in a contest in which each strives to show himself worthiest, emulating his competitors in hopes of having the honor of presenting her with a more splendid gift than anyone else could give. We are forced, however, to put this remarkable description together with the earlier criticism contained in the last passage quoted. Whatever the case with the wealthy outfitters of triremes, Athens did not hold the first place in the hearts of the multitude and of those hoplites who engaged in peacock altercations over their arms and apparel; their greatest desire was to earn money and acquire a source of eternal pay. What has the appearance of being a rivalry to serve the common good (perhaps it was an appearance which fooled even those caught up in it) turns out, on closer inspection, to be a rivalry to serve a host of private goods, private goods which happen to be temporarily congruent. Now Thucydides does not stop here but goes on to explore both the good and bad effects of citizenship-as-courtship to the bitter end of the Sicilian debacle. In brief, Alcibiades is one of three commanders chosen for the expedition. But before the ships set sail, an affair 16 �of bad omen occurs. The herms, or small statues of Hermes that guard private homes and sacred places, are mutilated all over the city in one night. This sacrilege also calls to mind accusations that religious mysteries have been profaned in private homes, a kind of black mass, probably only to ridicule and show contempt; but Alcibiades is implicated in the profanation of the mysteries. So the expedition sets sail under a cloud, and before it can accomplish much, Alcibiades is recalled to Athens to be put on trial for his role in the sacrilege, which has now become, in the public imagination, a full-blown plot to overthrow the democracy and bring back the tyranny that had once existed in Athens, only this time with Alcibiades at the helm. His re-call leads to a disaster because Alcibiades really is a talented general. Thucydides says that Alcibiades' public management of the war was very good-this even though Thucydides had also praised the conservative Periclean strategy of no new acquisitions until after the war, and condemned Athens for doing exactly the opposite, for doing exactly what Alcibiades is doing now, after Pericles' death. How do we fit these two statements together? Apparently, there were several ways to win the war. Pericles' way was the safest and surest. Alcibiades' strategy was risky but also quite possible or even likely. But it would take nerves of steel. So, if you must be daring, be daring with a daring leader, don't be daring with a timid leader. But the Athenians got spooked about Alcibiades and his monarchical intentions and decided to put him on trial, removing him from the command of the war, which then fell to the conservative Nicias, who ended up losing the entire expedition: men, materiel, everything. And Thucydides explores this debacle of citizenship-as-courtship through the one explicit, ordinary love affair (if any Greek love can be considered ordinary) in the book, the story ofHarmodius and Aristogeiton. Now as I said a very widespread interpretation of the Harmodius and Aristogeiton account is that Thucydides debunks the founding myth by exposing their eros. In short, 17 �because we modems know that eros is merely private, we assume the Greeks knew that too, hence to attribute the tyrant-slaying to eros instead ofto patriotism is enough said to debunk it. But this totally misunderstands the political character of Greek love that we have been seeing throughout the history. Everyone knew Harmodius and Aristogeiton were lovers-that did not debunk the myth at all. In fact they were celebrated as lovers. Their myth operated to show Athenians how love could provide a path to public deeds. You can read what I claim was the ordinary interpretation of the myth ofHarmodius and Aristogeiton in Plato's Symposium, in Pausanias' speech. In short, defending a boy's honor from a tyrant's lust is dimly symbolic of defending Athens' honor from-well, from a tyrant's lust: both are the work of passionate men who do not suffer an insult readily and who are willing to defend themselves and their own. So if Thucydides is not blowing the cover of Harmodius and Aristogeiton by exposing their eros, what does he intend to accomplish by stressing their eros? For he does stress it, relentlessly. In the following quotations, the English words "erotic" and "erotically" translate the Greek words erotike and erotikos. To understand the first quotation, it is important to remember that Hippias is the actual tyrant, Hipparchus is his brother, and their father Peisistratus was the previous tyrant. The daring deed of Harmodius and Aristogeiton was attempted on account of an erotic incident. ... When Harmodius had become radiant through the bloom of his youth, a man of the commoners, Aristogeiton, a citizen of middle rank, had him as his lover [erastes]. When Hipparchus son of Peisistratus attempted [to seduce] Harmodius but failed to persuade him, Harmodius complained of him to Aristogeiton. [Aristogeiton], smarting with pain erotically and fearing Hipparchus' power, lest he should take away Harmodius by force, immediately began plotting ... the dissolution of the tyranny. (6.54.1-3) Thucydides relates that although Hipparchus subtly revenged himself against Harmodius for not giving in to his importunities, finding an occasion to insult his sister publicly, nevertheless the tyranny exercised by this family had generally been benign, with the rulers exercising virtue and understanding. But now, at the last minute before Harmodius and Aristogeiton set 18 �in motion their plan to kill the tyrant Hippias and dissolve the tyranny, they mistakenly think their conspiracy is betrayed and that the tyrant has been warned. If they cannot not kill the tyrant himself, they want at least to revenge themselves against Hipparchus, the tyrant's brother, who started the whole thing: Immediately without circumspection they fell upon [Hipparchus], as especially happens in a passion: the one's [passion] being erotic, the other's on account of being insulted. They began striking him and they killed him. (6.57.3) It was with this sort of character, through erotic pain, that the beginning of the conspiracy and the irrational daring came to Harmodius and Aristogeiton out of their great alarm at the moment. For the Athenians the tyranny was harsher after this. (6.59.1-2) Not only did Harmodius and Aristogeiton not destroy the tyranny at Athens (it endured three more years until the Spartans put it down), they were instrumental in changing a benign tyranny into a harsh one. And of course the beloved, Harmodius, over whom the struggle was conducted, was lost to his lover Aristogeiton anyway since Harmodius was killed on the spot. (Aristogeiton escaped briefly only to be caught, tortured, and executed.) Now why does Thucydides stress their eros? Why does he bring up the old story of Harmodius and Aristogeiton at all in this new context of the Sicilian expedition? The witch hunt against Alcibiades is conducted in accordance with an analogy in the Athenian mind between Hipparchus (whom the Athenians mistakenly think was the tyrant back then) and Alcibiades, who is currently suspected of aiming at the tyranny. Popular leaders or demagogues (politicians who are Alcibiades' competition) speak in favor ofrecalling and arresting Alcibiades. These popular leaders are, in the public mind, the new tyrannicides, the latter-day analogues of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, who vanquish the new threat to Athenian freedom. The Athenians think they are replaying the drama of Harmodius and Aristogeiton during the Sicilian expedition. However, Thucydides turns this analogy on its head. The demagogues actually hope that by driving out Alcibiades they will themselves be able to seize preeminence in Athens (6.28.2, 6.29.3). Thucydides makes a point of saying that the 19 �harshness ofHippias' tyranny did not cause the tyrannicide. Rather, the botched attempt at tyrannicide caused the tyranny to grow harsh from that point on. The Athenians have mixed up cause and effect. Point for point, the alleged plot of Alcibiades against Athens does not cause the demagogues to arrest and recall him. Rather, their arrest and recall of Alcibiades causes him to plot against Athens after escaping the arresting officers (which is what he does). The eros for Sicily and Aristogeiton's eros for Harmodius are analogues. In wanting Sicily so much that they feel eros for it, the Athenians are likely to put the state at risk. Just as Aristogeiton harmed Athens through his erotic daring, so the Athenians now are in the process of harming Athens again. In feeling eros, both cities and individuals are vulnerable to fears and pains which make them lash out (as well as embrace) without circumspection. Now we are in a position to recognize how systematic Thucydides' critique of erotic citizenship has been all along. What was to all appearances a productive competition between and among rival suitors for the hand of Athens that we saw operating in the massive preparations for the Sicilian expedition, just as quickly degenerates into a destructive competition in the wake of the expedition's departure, namely in the actions that Alcibiades' rival politicians take against him. The problem with the eros surrounding Harmodius was that he already belonged to one suitor, while a rival suitor looked strong enough to take him away. An analogous problem occurs with the politicians' eros for Athens. Just as Aristogeiton could not bear the thought of his beloved wrested away by Hipparchus, so the demagogues (6.51.1) cannot bear the thought of a triumphant Alcibiades returning with Sicily in hand, prepared to offer Athens such a jewel for her crown that she might be tempted to give herself into his hands perpetually. Citizenship-as-courtship only works so long as the courtship continues and the beloved (the city)remains equally aloof from all suitors-equally aloof, in this case, from all of the politicians. As soon as one suitor is poised actually to win the contest, the other suitors are not likely to bow out gracefully. Even if the unrequited suitors could perceive that a marriage or permanent alliance with the successful suitor was in the best interest of the beloved, erotic desire is often so possessive that a disgruntled suitor would be willing to do 20 �harm to the beloved's interest rather than give her up. This is exactly what Alcibiades does later in the history, during his exile after escaping trial. He attempts to bring Athens to her knees in order to show her how much she needs him. He proves very successful at doing this. Alcibiades gives his definition of patriotism while offering his services to the Spartans (6.92.2-4). As he does elsewhere, Alcibiades puts his O'Ml characteristic twist on an idea that seemed benign in its Periclean version: I do not think I deserve to be thought bad by any of you ifl, who once seemed to be a patriot fphilopolis ], now go against my own city by force, in company with her worst enemies .... The true patriot fphilopolis] is not one who refuses to attack his city, though he lost her unjustly; rather, he is the one who will attempt to take her back by any means, on account of desiring [epithumein] her so. (6.92.4) Alcibiades' patriotism is erotic and, at least by this point in the history, aggressive. Let us try to take stock of the love theme in Thucydides. In exhorting the citizens to conduct themselves as lovers, Pericles discerns perhaps the sole motive that could incline perfectly free individuals, habituated (as he says) to their O'Ml private interest and toward pursuing pleasures, to take the good of another as their O'Ml good. In the self-forgetting of eros, people in love, then as now, were routinely seen to neglect themselves. (The most striking example of courtship given in the Symposium is that lovers often would camp out for the night on the beloved's doorstep (183a 6).) Eros makes people willingly enter into bonds that would otherwise look like slavery. Eros is at once perfectly free and perfectly committed. And, as we said, Thucydides seconds Pericles' claim that patriotism-and political behavior more generally-can be erotic, by including Diodotus' speech and by depictii:?-g the citizensduring the preparations for the Sicilian expedition-wholeheartedly engaged in just such courtship behavior-at the very least, that is what they think they are engaged in. Ordinary, non-erotic patriotism, by contrast, is probably based preponderantly on a love of one's own. No one ever told the Spartans, for example, to fall in love with Sparta- 21 �yet the Spartans remain fanatically committed to their own city. They love her because she is their own. They do not love her romantically. Pericles, in basing patriotism on an erotic response to the power of Athens and her grandeur, disdains a patriotism that is a parochial, subjective sentiment or unthinking affection for the surroundings in which one grew up. Our country is a lot like our parents, and we might as well face it, we do not select our parents and love them with the free choice by which we select a beloved and love that person. We are stuck with our parents. Pericles' Athenians are supposed to perceive that mere parochial attachment, being stuck in a given patch of ground, is a low motive for patriotism when opposed to the real merit and greatness of a city. If another city were better, they would face a difficult choice between which to love, but fortunately Athens is the fairest of them all. There is, as I started saying, another type of love that has traditionally been thought to constitute patriotism, a love implicit in the very word patriotism and its root,patria: land of our fathers (not to mention "land where our fathers died"). This love is not erotic at all; it is the filial love and filial piety a child is supposed to feel toward its parent. Pericles eschews this love, changing the type of love away from the love for a "motherland" or "fatherland"-in favor of the more active, energetic passion of the lover. A lover or suitor seems to have designs on the beloved; he wishes to win the game of courtship against all the other suitors, and take possession of the beloved. But the political analogue, taking exclusive possession of Athens, would be tantamount to tyranny or at least monarchy. How did Pericles know that an Alcibiades would not come along to take him at his word? Again, we have seen how Pericles attempted to transcend the love of one's own. Perhaps, as we earlier surmised, the highest eros, for Pericles, would not be selfishly possessive but would content itself with contemplating the beloved. Many written sources describing pederasty, that important personto-person type of Greek love, do indeed seem to speak of stopping short of bodily congress, stopping short of bodily possession or incorporation, and of instead remaining content with contemplation alone: gazing at the beloved. A contemplative love for a city might look something like the Platonic eros near the top ofDiotima's ladder oflove in the Symposium- 22 �for example, she mentions contemplating the beauty in customs and laws (210c 2-3). These would include political institutions (as Pericles also saw), and they would locate the eros of the Funeral Oration on a high rung on the ladder of love. But in support of the traditional kind of patriotism, we have to note that filial love also worked well to the extent that it was antityrannical. A person who feels filial love toward his city protects it against others and against himself. The child's feelings for its mother, like the citizen's feelings for his motherland, are protective: citizens feeling filial patriotism would be jealous of politicians who were essentially suitors, and they would resist tyranny analogously to the way a child resists when its mother takes a new husband. The demagogues at Athens resisted Alcibiades, and patriots feeling filial love would resist him too. But unlike the demagogues, a citizen who felt filial love would not be desirous of becoming his mother's new husband himself. One of the clearest examples of this is in Plutarch's Life of Caesar (32.6): the night before Caesar crosses the Rubicon to attack Rome, he dreams of committing incest with his mother. Rome was hispatria but also, Plutarch implies, his motherland, and an entity toward whom to feel eros was a crime. So Pericles' switch of the types of love that constitute patriotism was fraught with risks although we also saw its potential for high returns. It is instructive to see just how unusual it was for a statesman to place patriotism on an erotic basis. Even in the context of a society whose athletic nudity brought the material basis of eros into the public view, a society which told itself that love should forge a path to public deeds, as in the myth of Harmodius and Aristogeiton-even in this context, Pericles was attempting to do something exquisitely rare. Just how rare- and how close to Platonic love-Periclean Athens was reaching, appears when we consider the mother of all paradoxes, the observation that when eros finally descends upon the elite young men, they fall in love not with Athens, as Pericles intended, but with a foreign land. Perhaps one should amend that slightly: they fall in love with their idea of what experiencing the sights and spectacles of Greater Greece might be like. Perhaps the most patriotic interpretation of imperialism generally, is that the citizens love their country so 23 �much that they wish to adorn her with a jewel in her crown. They may feel deeply that their country deserves such a foremost position among nations. They dream of being the one who confers the rightful honor on their country, winning the jewel for her. But the jewel may be attractive in its own right. These Athenians, the elite young men, are attracted to the jewel. This, at least, was predictable. The beautiful and the good are not always home grown. Pericles' project to let a higher love override the attachment to one's own, works in their case, but that higher love overrides not only their attachment to their own personal "own"; it also overrides their attachment to Athens' own. Their eros overrides the oikeion in both senses. If, in loving Athens, they are to follow their hearts, then they must also follow wherever their hearts may lead. Why not follow one's heart to Sicily? The ordinary love ofpatria must open up to include every place or land that merits appreciation. Again, in filial patriotism, the citizen and his motherland are stuck with one another. But romantic love is fickle, and eros likes to play the field. Now, the elite young men have not forgotten themselves to the extent of forgetting that they are Athenian. They remain hopeful of a safe return-to Athens. But they have forgotten themselves to the extent that they are forgetting their duty: under the influence of eros, they are forgetting themselves qua patriots, since patriots would first see to it that their city took no harm. Ultimately, erotic patriotism tries for too much. Athens errs in a direction opposite from Sparta's error. Just as Sparta errs in attempting to stamp out the struggle of the human mind to transcend parochial limits, so Pericles' transcendent patriotism implies a disembodied mind that forgets the local and particular requirements of community. In an attempt to be universal, Periclean Athens must give up her own, give up her self: she must give herself up. Pericles' vision is humanly and philosophically superior to the Spartan way; the only matters in question are his vision's security and safety, its achievability, the ability of citizens to find a modus vivendi with these high expectations, and its sustainability or longevity. These factors prove decisive politically, but they do not exhaust the philosophic questions toward which this 24 �political history of Athens points in same the way a shadow points toward its concrete object. No one can consciously and seriously accept the proposition that the only reason he loves his community is because it is his own. The human mind will strive to claim that its own is also good. But likewise it would take a quite extraordinary person, a Socrates in fact, truly to love whatever things he loves, only for their beauty or goodness, and not because they are his own. Socrates neglected his own children, and hung around other people's children, because his own children were not the most beautiful and intelligent children in the neighborhood-which in a neat way shows the monstrosity of this perfectly rational eros. Greek pederasty (there's that public nudity again) allegedly brought quite a number of adult males, at least within a certain stratum of society, halfway round to a Socratic position: pursuing beautiful boys and educating them, perhaps even while someone else pursued their sons and educated them. Possibly such a perfect reciprocity as this is only an imaginary limiting case of tendencies and aspirations within Greek pederasty: its ideal form. Notwithstanding such peculiarities (and partly because of them), the tiny Greek cities, and Athens in particular, stake some of the strongest claims to universality of any societies we know. Yet they fall short, leaving us to ponder the further question of whether the eros that inspired them may have found its fulfillment, and the universality toward which that eros pointed, may have been achieved, not by those communities as wholes, but by some of the individuals within them. 25 �Pericles' Funeral Oration I) Do not in word alone inspect the profit-which anyone could expound at length to you who know it yourselves no worse than he, telling how many good things depend upon defense against enemies, but rather, actively contemplate [theomenoi] the power of the city, day after day, and become lovers [erastai] of it [the power or: "of her," Athens], and when she seems great to you, take it to heart that daring men, men who knew what was needful, and who, in their actions, were sensible of dishonor, acquired these things; and if they ever failed in an attempt, they deemed it unworthy to deprive the city of their excellence, but gave themselves away as their finest favor to her. (2.43.1) 2) [Our leaders] have a care for their own private matters [oikeia] at the same time as political affairs, while the rest, people with permanent jobs, have no small understanding of politics . And the man who refuses to participate in politics? We alone [among the Greeks] do not consider him to be minding his own business but rather to be simply useless. (2.40.2) 3) The love of honor [to philotimon] alone never grows old, and the better enjoyment ... is not material gain as some say, but receiving honor (to timasthai, 2.44.4). 4) Invading the [land] of our neighbors we fight without difficulty on alien ground [en tei allotriai] against men who are defending themselves in the midst of their own [peri ton oikeon] and for the most part we conquer. (2.39.2) 5) On account of the stature of our city, all things come into her from every land; whence it happens that for us, reaping the goods produced here is no more familiar [oikeiotera, "no more our own"] an enjoyment than reaping those of other people. (2.38.3) 6) We have forced every sea and land to become the highway of our daring, and everywhere we have set up eternal [aidia] monuments to both good and evil. (2.41.4) 7) For the whole world is the tomb of illustrious men, and not only does the epitaph on gravestones signal it in their own land [en tei oikeiai]; but also, in land not belonging to them, there dwells an unwritten marker in every mind if not in fact. (2.43.2-3) The speech of the Corinthians at the Peloponnesian conference 8) In their city's behalf, they treat their bodies as if completely alienated from them [allotriotata] . And on deeds in her behalf they use their intellect, though it is their ownmost [oikeiotate]. (1.70.6) 9) When they fail to prosecute their schemes, they feel deprived of what is their own [oikeia]. But when they do invade and acquire something, they regard it a small deed compared with things to come . . . . For them alone, hoping and having are the same . . . . ( l. 70. 7, emphasis added) �Diodotus' speech during the Mytilenean debate 10) Hope and eros everywhere, the latter leading, the former following on-[eros] conceiving the plot, [hope] guaranteeing the resources for a good fortune-do the greatest harm and, though invisible themselves, are stronger than visible terrors. And fortune in addition to these contributes no Jess to the excitement: unlooked-for, she is there, leading men on to gamble with inferior means, and this is no less the case with cities, in proportion as they concern the greatest things: freedom and empire .... (3.45.5-6) The Sicilian expedition 11) Eros fell upon all alike to sail forth. [It fell] upon the elders, [who thought] that either they would subdue whatever they sailed against or that a great force would in no way be overthrown. [It fell] upon the young men through a longing for far-away sights and spectacles [opsis kai theoria], being of good hope, as they were, of coming back safe. And the great multitude and the soldier intended to earn money, in the short run, and besides that to acquire power whence wages might accrue to them eternally [aidion]. (6.24.3) Harmodius and Aristogeiton 12) The daring deed of Harmodius and Aristogeiton was attempted on account of an erotic incident. ... When Harmodius had become radiant through the bloom of his youth, a man of the commoners, Aristogeiton, a citizen of middle rank, had him as his Jover [erastes]. When Hipparchus son of Peisistratus attempted [to seduce] Harmodius but failed to persuade him, Harmodius complained of him to Aristogeiton. [Aristogeiton], smarting with pain erotically and fearing Hipparchus' power, lest he should take away Hannodius by force, immediately began plotting . .. the dissolution of the tyranny. (6.54.1-3) 13) Immediately without circumspection they fell upon [Hipparchus], as especially happens in a passion: the one's [passion] being erotic, the other's on account of being insulted. They began striking him and they killed him. (6.57.3) It was with this sort of character, through erotic pain, that the beginning of the conspiracy and the irrational daring came to Harmodius and Aristogeiton out of their great alarm at the moment. For the Athenians the tyranny was harsher after this. (6.59.1-2) Alcibiades at Sparta 14) I do not think I deserve to be thought bad by any of you ifl, who once seemed to be a patriot [philopolis], now go against my own city by force, in company with her worst enemies.. . . The true patriot [philopolis] is not one who refuses to attack his city, though he lost her unjustly; rather, he is the one who will attempt to take her back by any means, on account of desiring [epithumein] her so. (6.92.4) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data paper Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 27 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Erotic Theme in Thucydides' Peloponnesian War Description An account of the resource Typescript of a lecture delivered by Paul Ludwig on December 5, 2003, as part of the Formal Lecture Series. A handout given to lecture attendees is included with the typescript. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ludwig, Paul W. (Paul Walter), 1963- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2003-12-05 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make an audio recording of my lecture available online. Make typescript copies of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make typescript copies of my lecture available online." Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War Eroticism in literature Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Ludwig_Paul_2003-12-05 Friday night lecture Tutors https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/a5f4ba6f0429f7b5db5370a7d7575356.pdf 2a601a227a7ae0096ca3708834e70355 PDF Text Text History and Existentialism in the Raj Quartet" Paul Ludwig This lecture is going to be about History, a discipline we don't teach at St John's, and Existentialism, a school of thought we don't recognize at St John's, all in a series of novels, the Raj Quartet, that are not on the St John's list of Great Books. Students who are already swamped with work and busy parents alike may be forgiven for thinking that a major project ofreading about the last days of British rule in India is not in their immediate future-let alone the Raj Quartet's four massive volumes averaging four hundred pages each. Nevertheless, I hope to tempt you, as India has seduced many a Western adventurer before you, into reading at least the first volume, entitled The Jewel in the Crown, which stands on its own as a separate novel. I secretly know that if you read the first one, you will get hooked. Students will then get in trouble with the Dean or with the Director of the G.I. as they attempt to fit in, between tutorial and seminar, a little side reading on the second volume, The Day of the Scorpion. How can I justify leading you so far astray? Luckily, modern technology comes to our rescue: there is a movie version. And this is one case in which watching the movie is not a sign of intellectual shallowness. The title of the movie is identical to the title of the first volume, The Jewel in the Crown, although it is important that you should know the movie covers the events of all four novels, the whole Raj Quartet. You can find the videotapes in our College library, as well as in many catalogue companies who sell BBC shows to us Americans. The movie is so good, that it is hard to realize-while watching it-how much better the books are. When it first aired as a television serial on weekday evenings, the streets of °Friday Lecture delivered at St John's College, Annapolis, on November 5, 2004 (Parents' Weekend). �London were deserted, so they say, as they had not been since the Blitz. Everyone was indoors watching it on TV. For those wary of the production values of 1970's BBC broadcasts (everything looked like Doctor Who) the production of The Jewel in the Crown aired in 1984 and caught the wave, as it were, when British film-making was coming into a kind of ascendancy in their absolute fidelity to historical period. So if you are pressed for time, as you are, and if you want to take a short rest from reading, you're in luck. If you get hooked, though, and find you have to start reading the books, don't say I didn't warn you. The movie version captures only a small portion of the drama of ideas, but it captures amazingly well the drama proper (the story-Jine), the characterizations, the mood, and what I can only call, the wonder. I will try to convey some of each of these, and while I want to focus on the drama of ideas, therein lies a problem. If you really wanted to learn about the history of the British in India, you could learn more accurate information faster by going to a history book. And if you really wanted to learn something about Existentialism, you could read a philosopher. In fact, some philosophers on the Program, namely Kierkegaard and Heidegger, have been labeled Existentialists by academics at other, more shallow institutions. So what I said at the beginning was not strictly true. We do study "Existentialists" at St John's, we simply do not want to prejudice our reading of them by calling them that. And even though Existentialism is said to have influenced a lot of literature-Dostoevsky is supposed to be another "Existentialist"-surely reading novels is a backwards kind of way to get into Existentialism. Another, deeper problem, is that a very respectable opinion, probably held by quite a number of you, goes something like this: "novels are works of art; they don't intend to foist ideas on us. Trying to derive philosophical ideas from stories is like milking a billygoat; you treat the story as something that it's not and hence inevitably fail to appreciate it for what it is." One of my warmest memories of being a freshman tutor is of sitting around after an archon meeting chatting informally with other younger tutors 2 �about the Odyssey, when someone made the mistake of wondering what a certain incident in the Odyssey was really about. Our archon, a senior tutor and an excellent reader of literature (but he shall remain nameless), interrupted the conversation, saying "Anyone who thinks the Odyssey is about something, is a jackass!" It was a great way for a young tutor to come to realize that there was more than one opinion about how to read at St John's. "Poetry asserts nothing." That is the classical expression of the senior tutor's sentiment. My own opinion is that poetry, literature, can make assertions, and that the classical statement, "poetry asserts nothing," was partly intended to defend poetry, to screen poetry from censorship, by pretending that poetry has less to say than it really does. And indeed, the author always can hide behind his characters and say: "I wasn't the one saying that-one of my characters said it." Sometimes the author might be saying that in all truth. But other times, we don't have to believe him. I admit, though, that this opinion of mine partly derives from weakness-I need a good story to keep my attention from flagging. History does not do it for me unless it is written by a master at narrative. And I am so lazy that I learn philosophy better from literature and only later go to the philosophers themselves to compare notes and decide if I have learned anything solid. So a novel has to be a good yarn before it can teach. It has to be good poetry first. And if that is all you want in a novel, you, too, have come to the right place. The Raj Quartet has all that you are looking for, and more. So before getting into history and philosophy, let me start by showing that Paul Scott, the author of the Raj Quartet, can write. For me, wonder is the primary experience of reading the Raj Quartet. So let us start with some of the wonder. Before looking at the first passage, I should say just briefly that I did not discover this wonder on my own: I had people who showed it to me. The Raj Quartet has been on a kind of informal St John's reading list among tutors for many years. And this is proof that St John's tutors do not only read great books. One rather basic reason why tutors read other books is that we could never find other great books if we never read anything 3 �but what someone has alleged to be great. In the opinion of the tutors who preceded me and showed me the wonder of the Raj Quartet, the Raj Quartet is a great work of world literature, as great as, hold onto your hats, War and Peace. Two of my predecessors were our former college librarian, Kitty Kinzer, and a tutor, Beate Von Oppen-her niece recommended the Jewel in the Crown to Beate as something to read during an airplane journey: that is how chance can put you on to something important. Study of the Raj Quartet became formal at Annapolis two years ago, with a faculty study group of thirteen tutors, funded by a grant from Ambassador Adolph Schmidt. So what I said earlier about the Raj Quartet not being on the Program is only true in a literal-minded way. Two of the faculty members of that study group have since passed away, and they are the same two who introduced these books to the College: Kitty Kinzer and Beate Von Oppen. I would like to dedicate this lecture to them. So first: the wonder. I will read three very brief passages from the first volume, The Jewel in the Crown. They are printed in your handout, and I apologize in advance if I butcher them. The main story is set in 1942, but the three passages are historical flashbacks to several earlier Indias. The first passage is about native India, divided into many small kingdoms: the Brits are already in the land, trading and defending their trade with armies, but there are many kingdoms they have not taken over yet (some of which in fact they would never take over). What I like about the first passage is the way the Indian names for trees somehow still convey something to us, even though most Englishspeakers have heard of maybe one or two of these trees, at most. This is the first passage on the handout 1: 1 Paul Scott, The Raj Quartet, Volume I, The Jewel in the Crown (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, [1966] 1998), pp. 67-8. The succeeding volumes, also published by University of Chicago Press in 1998, with their original dates are as follows: The Day ofthe Scorpion (1968), The Towers o/Silence (1971), andA Division of 4 �The [MacGregor] house stands in the middle of the garden, protected from the outside world by close-formed battalions of trees: neem, pipul, gol mohur, tamarind, casuarina and banyan; it goes back to the eighteenth century and was built by a prince who conceived a passion for a singer of classical music. To build a house and install a woman in it is an expensive way to beg her favours. It was said that he came to visit her morning and evening, and that she sang to him . . . and that he became enamoured finally only of her voice and was content to listen while she instructed the pupils he permitted her to receive. Scheherezade told stories to postpone the hour of her execution. The singer sang to guard her honor. When the singer died the prince grieved. People said he died of a broken heart. The house was deserted, closed. Like the state it decayed, fell into ruin. The prince's son succeeded to the gaddi. He despised his father for his futile attachment to the singer. He would let no one live there. He built another house nearby, the Bibighar, where he kept his courtesans. He was a voluptuary. He emptied the treasury. His people starved. An Englishman at his court was poisoned and so the new prince was deposed, imprisoned, his state annexed [by the British], and his people were glad of it until time lay over the memory of the old bad but not the badness of the present. The decayed house of the singer was rebuilt by a red-faced Scottish nabob called MacGregor who feared God and favoured Muslims, and was afraid of temples. The story goes that he burned the Bibighar to the ground because he said it had been an abomination. the Spoils (1975). Henceforth the volumes will be referred to as Jewel, Scorpion, Towers, and Division. 5 �At least one hundred years separate this India of the Maharajahs, the Indian princes-father, son, singer and courtesans--from the India where MacGregor, a merchant and a "collector," is carving out a fortune and acting as the de facto ruler of Mayapore. The only thing you need to know about the second passage is that even by MacGregor's time, English womenfolk have not come to small interior states like Mayapore yet-white women are found only in the big British-built coastal cities like Calcutta. The British tell themselves that MacGregor destroyed the Bibighar-which literally means "house of women"-because keeping a house full of courtesans was immoral. But a little later in the novel we learn a different version of the story. Competing perspectives, we shall find, are going to be typical of the Raj Quartet. Here is the second passage on the handout2 : But then this was the European version of the tale. . . . [MacGregor] burned Bibighar, not, according to the Indian version, because it was an abomination in his eye and the eye of the Lord ... but because he fell in love with an Indian girl and lost her to a boy whose skin was the same colour as her own. There are two versions of the Indian account of the burning of Bibighar. The first is that he discovered that the girl and her lover met in the Bibighar, and that he then destroyed it in a fit of jealous rage. The second is that he told the girl she would have to leave the MacGregor House and live in the Bibighar. He took her there and showed her the repairs he had made to it and the furnishings and clothes he had bought for her comfort and enjoyment. When she asked him why she must leave the MacGregor House, he said: Because I am going to Calcutta to bring back an English wife. So that night she stole away with her true lover. When he 2 Jewel, pp. 140-1. Spoken by the character known as Sister Ludmila. 6 �found that she had gone, he ordered the Bibighar to be burned to the ground, and then utterly obliterated. Not only are there two versions of the story, British and Indian-there are two versions of the Indian version! Like a good historian, the author, Paul Scott, tries to tell all sides of the story. Like Herodotus, Paul Scott knows that truth is hard to get at, and what people say about an event comes to be as important as the event itself. People's versions take on lives of their own. Now, in reality, of course, Scott himself is making up all three versions. He is showing us what doing a history would be like, rather than showing us a real history. You may have noticed thatlhave broken my promise and started talking about history already, when I was supposed to be only showing that Paul Scott is a good writer. And Herodotus, whom I mentioned, is clearly a program author, so what I said at the beginning about St John's not teaching history was not strictly true. That would the third tintruth I have told tonight-so far. Not only do Johnnies read some historians, but Johnnies are constantly learning to act as historians themselves-historians of intellectual history-by interpreting the evidence of original sources: and in roughly chronological order, to boot. But what Johnnies emphatically do not do is to try to place authors into the context of what other historians have alleged about their times: the political, social and economic history of their times that may--or may not-have influenced the author's ideas. Our philosophy is: better to err on the side of allowing the authors to be too original than to chop them down to size to fit a prejudgment about their alleged context. One ofthe philosophies of history presented in the Raj Quartet will explicitly disagree with the St John's philosophy. The Existentialist philosophy of history partakes of what is known as historicism. Historicism in its most extreme form doubts whether any originality is possible; it understand us all to be products of our social, political and economic contexts. So, I apologize for dragging philosophy and history into it ahead of time, but these get so intertwined with literary art in Scott's novels that it is hard to talk 7 �about his art without saying what the novels are about, getting into their ideas. The narrator of The Jewel in the Crown initially appears to be an omniscient narrator: he seems like Paul Scott himself. But in fact this narrator is gradually revealed to be a historian (himself with a limited viewpoint) who has returned to India in 1963, long after Independence was granted by the British. This unnamed historian has come back to learn about what happened in those last days before Independence, specifically what happened on a mysterious night in 1942, when an Englishwoman was raped during political unrest. The narrator's use of competing perspectives, British vs. Indian, Indian vs. Indian-a technique sometimes called Perspectivism-goes together with another narrative technique, which I will call the Telescoping of time. In the brief passages we are reading, four different time-periods are present. We have already talked about the eighteenth century Indian princes and the nineteenth century merchant-imperialists, but I left out a sentence in which the historian in 1963, visiting the MacGregor house as part of his investigation, hears a young girl taking classical music lessons; she is singing the same songs now, in 1963, that the classical singer sang to her prince inthe eighteenth century. Eighteenth century, nineteenth century, 1963: these are all frame and background for the story proper, which takes place in 1942. Like a telescope closing up, time past and time future are always present-in the Raj Quartet-in time present. And the fascinating thing, the wonder that sends a shiver up the spine, is that many of the same sorts of occurrences are repeating themselves in all four time periods. Not just the music: an illegitimate love affair is veering toward tragedy in three of the four periods. Consider the third passage on the handout. Here we are back in the India of the princes again, when the voluptuary son gets the last word over his father. Don't blame me for taking these passages out of order: Scott himself deals with these occurrences out of order. He wants us to go back and ponder the earlier ones armed with what we know from the later ones. Recall that the singer's house fell into ruin, after her death, before 8 �MacGregor came along to rebuild it, but the Bibighar, the "house of women" or prostitutes, flourished. This is the third passage on the handout3: In those days, when Mayapore was a kingdom, on that side of the river there were no other buildings, and so those two houses were marks on the landscape, monuments to love, the love of the father for the singer and the love of the son for the courtesans, the son who despised his father for an attachment which, so the story goes, was never consummated. Day by day I think the son climbed the tower of the palace or to the highest room in the Bibighar to survey that other house, the singer's house, to glory in its decay, and said to himself, Such is the fate of love never made manifest." The tale of the last days of Britain's India empire is going to be the tale of a love never made manifest, an erotic attraction to India that could only be consummated in a kind of rape but could never dare to admit to itself that it might be love, for that would have led to an open embrace or dalliance that would have put the English and the Indians on an equal footing, undermining the ethical pretext of the "civilizing mission" that had become the way the British justified their empire to themselves. Surprisingly, Paul Scott or his narrator is not on the side of the father who did not consummate his love, but on the side of the voluptuary son, who at least made his love-such as it was-manifest. So: Scott can write prose with a touch of poetry. But can he spin a yarn? Let us look briefly at the story-line. 1942. An English girl has come to live in the MacGregor House. Her name is Daphne Manners. She has lost her family in the Blitz, and has been driving an ambulance during the bombing of London. She comes to live in India with an Aunt, 3 Jewel, p. 139, another of Sister Ludmila's musings. Emphasis in original. 9 �Lady Manners, the only family she has left. The story of Daphne's revulsion with all things Indian is too detailed to go into, but it is beautifully told. She initially stays with her Aunt, the widow of a Governor, in the predominantly Muslim city of Rawalpindi. Just when she thinks she might be growing to like India a little bit, she journeys to predominantly Hindu Mayapore where her Aunt's Indian friend-also a titled LadyLady Chatterjee, widow of an Indian who was knighted for his service to the Raj, lives in the MacGregor House, one of the only Indians on the British side of the river. Mayapore is now split into the British town north of the river, and the Indian town south of the river. Daphne's descent into ever-greater alienness, first into Islam and from there into Hindu territory is accompanied by extreme revulsion, not only or primarily with the poverty and living conditions but with the utterly alien cultures, what the locals consider good food, and the ways of life and death. The MacGregor House is one of the few places in Mayapore where Indians and British mix socially and only then at carefully contrived drinks parties. Daphne brings with her progressive liberal notions about the meaninglessness of racial distinctions as well as an unprejudiced heart that attempts to find the human in the other. But she finds her fellow Brits in India to be living in a land that time forgot; their attitudes toward race and their resistance to eventual self-rule for India are essentially nineteenth century holdovers living on into the twentieth century. Daphne is determined to appreciate and eventually love every aspect of India that she possibly can, and we gradually realize that this girl who is too tall, clumsy, average-looking, near-sighted, and naive.has capacities for cultural assimilation which give her what can only be called moral grandeur. If Daphne were ever to fall in love, she would make her love manifest. She falls in love with a young Indian named Hari Kumar. And here is the first twist: Hari, too, has just come to India. He grew up in England, .son of an Indian father who admired British ways, assimilated, made and lost a fortune, committed suicide, and left his eighteen-year-old son stranded at his elite English boarding school with no 10 �money. Hari, too, has just come to live with his Aunt, and Hari is, if anything, more revolted by India than Daphne was. This is because Hari is, if anything, the most English character in the book. In everything but skin color: in attitudes, outlook, character, he is utterly English and utterly at sea in India. He is so English that he is even upper-class (thanks to his boarding school education); he shares the hauteur of the ruling British but .in India he can never be one of them. Somewhere on the ship over to India, it happened. Although Hari had scarcely noticed he was brownskinned before (he had white friends, he was accepted in England), at some point near the Gulf of Suez, his fellow British passengers began to exclude him and socialize only among themselves, with their fellow whites. People who would never have felt that way at home, became, as India approached, frightened or racially conscious for the first time, and joined ranks against him, expecting that he too would now join his own kind. But Hari has no kind, unless it is the British themselves, for Hari is as far from an Indian as it is possible to be. And this is one of the historical and academic glints that decorate and inform the novels, because Hari Kumar (in England he was called Harry Coomer) is one of the "brown-skinned Englishmen" whom the historian and planner of empire Thomas Babington Macaulay envisioned in a famous speech before the British parliament on how Indians should be educated: to create "a class of persons Indian in colour and blood, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect ... who may be interpreters between us and the millions we govem."4 Paul Scott merely takes Macaulay at his word and shows us such a person. But what will happen to such a person if the British ever decide to leave India? Not British enough for the British, not Indian enough for "the millions we govern," Hari is destined to be forever a loose end in the incomplete project of empire. 4 Compare Jewel, p. 248, with Division, p. 301. See also John Keay, India: A History (New York: Grove Press, 2002), p. 431. 11 �Did I start philosophizing again? Sorry. With these novels, it's hard not to. When Hari finally scrapes up courage to cross the river into the British town, he feels like he has come home: clean lines, uncluttered streets, ordered civic life. When he enters a pharmacy, his heart leaps up to discover brand-name items that he is used to. (If you have ever been lonely in a foreign country, you will know how much those commercial items can mean to a traveler). But when he attempts to purchase a bar of soap, he encounters only contempt and prejudice, particularly when the memsahibs (white ladies) hear him speaking (aping, as they see it) upper-class-accented English. An Indian does not belong in the British town, unless he is the servant of a white. Hari literally becomes a man without a country, or without a community. Hari concludes (Jewel, p. 242): his father had succeeded in making him nothing, nothing in the black town, nothing in the [British] cantonment, nothing even in England because in England he was now no more than a memory ... . This language of nothingness will loom very large. For nothingness (as in Jean-Paul Sartre's title Being and Nothingness) is just what an Existentialist thinks we ought to think about ourselves. That we are nothing, on our own, nothing but a web of influences, totally determined by our backgrounds: our genes, our race, our religion, our upbringing, · our height and sex even. There is no escaping those determinants, or at least: no way to be certain we have free will. Every choice we make can be traced to those all-powerful factors. So philosophy is going to be right up front in the story-line. O.K., maybe I should drop even the pretense of "just telling the story." It can be done, but I can't do it. As you have probably guessed by now, Hari and Daphne will become illegitimate lovers. They meet at a racially mixed party at the MacGregor House. They have trouble from the start-not because of the outward pressure from the different 12 �communities they belong to, the English and Indian communities, both of which consider interracial love to be taboo. That is the least of their problems. Their problems are internal: the communities they both come from-their backgrounds-have predisposed them (it is so unconscious that it is like a genetic predisposition) to accept the taboo. Theory alone, theory that racial distinctions are meaningless, is not enough. It is very hard to put the theory into practice. Part of Hari's situation is that "a dark-skinned man touching a white-skinned woman will always be conscious of the fact that he isdiminishing her."5 When Hari beings to fall in love with Daphne, he deliberately attempts to put her off, warn her away from him, by behaving on one of their illicit dates the way he imagines a middle-class Indian male would behave. Since the English won't let Hari be English anymore, since he must be Indian, he will behave like the English stereotype of an Indian male: outwardly polite, but underneath selfish and aggressive, eating with his fingers, treating the servants like dirt, making the girl conform to his wishes, playing Indian music which he hated (and expected her to hate) on the gramophone. But he underestimates Daphne, who by this time has come to love many aspects of India: she particularly likes Indian music, which she says is the only musiC in the world that is conscious of breaking silence. Daphne does not mind lndianness if Hari wants to be Indian; she is only worried why he is acting so strangely. When a moment comes in their relationship when Hari should touch Daphne, she recalls (Jewel, pp. 410-11): He was afraid to. He was too conscious of the weight that would have made touching a gesture of defiance of the rule ... , and he didn't have that kind of courage, and so I was deprived of my own. The defiance had to come from him first, to make it human, to make it right. 5 Scorpion, p. 217, spoken by the villain Merrick. 13 �For Daphne to provide the defiance of the taboo would further unsex Hari (Jewel, p. 411 ): a ruling memsahib taking a hapless Indian by the hand. Hari and Daphne are stymied by their awareness that a brown man with a white woman must be "taking advantage of her" in some way or another. A general thesis put forward by less liberalminded Brits is that "an Indian will always take advantage of an English person who is friendly." And there is some truth to the thesis, since indeed the ruling caste of whites always does hold the keys to all advancement for a ruled caste of browns. It follows that Indians always want something. It also follows that any union between the two of them must be exploitative. One night-a dangerous night because there is civil unrest in Mayapore: Gandhi and the Indian National Congress party leadership have been interned by the British because the British, after all, have a war to fight with the Japanese, and Gandhi's noncooperation movement is not helping-on that night, the night of the civil unrest, Hari and Daphne are sitting together in the deserted Bibighar garden. The ruined "house" of women where love was at least made manifest is gone, only a garden remains, which has become a kind of informal public park. Daphne takes Hari's hand briefly to light her cigarette (Jewel, 416): After a while he said, "What were you trying to prove? That you don't mind our touching?" I said, "I thought we'd got beyond that." "No," he said, "we can never get beyond it." The "gesture of defiance" that needed to come from Hari finally materializes when he takes away her cigarette (which he considers a disgusting, Indian-made cigarette). He grabs her wrist and throws the cigarette away. "That catching hold of my wrist was like 14 �the impatient gesture of a lover. For him it was like that too." Once the boundary is crossed, their desire breaks through the dam. Unbeknownst to the couple, a group of Indian men, rioters who have come in from the country during the political unrest, are watching them in the darkness of the garden. For these men, a taboo is broken when they see a black man touching a white woman. They catch the couple unawares, forcibly restrain Hari, and rape Daphne. Hari himself is now a prime suspect in the rape because no one will believe that an English girl was in the garden alone with an Indian, consensually. What will happen to Hari? Enter the philosopher, stage left. The British District Superintendent of Police, Ronald Merrick, who hauls Hari in for questioning, and subjects him to brutal torture, attempting to extract a confession, also proceeds to give a philosophic account-a reasonable explanation-to Hari: an explanation of all the problems that Hari has been experiencing and thinking about since he came back to India and especially since he met Daphne. "Wait," you're saying, "a philosopher who tortures? I don't remember Socrates ever doing that." But this is a very different kind of philosophy, a philosophy that recognizes no distinction between contemplation and action. Merrick wants Hari to confess to the crime, a crime he knows Hari did not commit. Or does Merrickknow it? It turns out that, for Merrick, there may be no firm link between committing a crime, and being guilty for it. Contrary to the reader's expectation of ordinary police corruption or ordinary racism, Merrick proceeds to reveal to Hari a full-blown philosophy of history and human agency. You will notice that this lengthy philosophizing is integrated into the story-line. I did not put it there. Oh, I admit that we readers do not actually learn everything that was said in that jail cell until the second volume, The Day ofthe Scorpion, over a year later when Hari is interviewed, still in prison. But that just gives you incentive to read volume two, and not stop at volume one. 15 �Hari later recounts how Merrick began to talk. Merrick's philosophy is a philosophy of the so-called "situation." "He said history was a sum of situations whose significance was never seen until long afterwards because people had been afraid to act them out" (Scorpion, p. 297). "They preferred to think of the situations they found themselves in as part of a general drift of events they had no control over ... ". The rajBritish rule in India-has felt itself swept along by just such a current or drift since well before the onset of World War II: attitudes are changing and British power in India is unraveling. History itself seem to be drifting in the direction of liberation, and raj functionaries both of the civil and the military passively assume there is nothing they can do to stem the tide. Tonight, a white and a brown, Merrick and Hari, find themselves in position to reaffirm the raj's power. To prevent their moment together from sinking into the general drift, Merrick believes both he and Hari must avoid the passivity of the aforesaid rajwhites, those who "couldn't face up to their responsibility" for their situations. Curiously, the passive majority are probably correct about the hopelessness of taking control of the moment, in Merrick's view: "He didn't think he could go so far as to say you could change the course of events by acting out situations you found yourself in .. ". At most Merrick and Hari will have the satisfaction of knowing they did all they could to stem the tide of the liberalizing drift: "you'd ... take what steps you could to stop things drifting in the wrong direction, or an unreal direction." Merrick insists Hari should take responsibility. "That's what you've got to admit ... your responsibility for that girl getting [raped]. If you were a hundred miles away you'd still be responsible" (Scorpion, p. 298). Surely this is a very odd notion of responsibility that Merrick has. But Merrick practices what he preaches: he, too, is willing to take responsibility for a something he didn't commit. Merrick says he will take responsibility for the liberal whites' misrule, even though Merrick himself has obviously contributed nothing to the raj's drift toward liberalization and eventual liberation. Precisely taking responsibility for situations that are not one's fault is what Merrick 16 �recommends. This notion of "responsibility" is unusual, and its usage goes back to a philosopher other than the fictional Merrick but one equally controversial (drum roll, please): the philosopher Martin Heidegger. Merrick's philosophy conforms point by point with Being and Time, Division Two, Chapter 2: "Dasein's Attestation of an Authentic Potentiality-For-Being, and Resoluteness" (there's a mouthful), especially section 60. Now I am going to do what you "poetry-asserts-nothing" types feared. I have perfectly good words on the page of the novel to interpret, but instead of letting them speak for themselves, I am going to drag in a philosophical text. But my claim is that we are driven to it. It's not that the novel cannot speak for itself. (It does speak for itself.) Rather, the novel is giving us a chance to enrich our understanding of philosophy, too-we have the chance to go back to Paul Scott's own sources and learn what he knew. And, in keeping with my own personal lazy way oflearning philosophy, I feel driven to confront Merrick's "Existentialism" with that of a known "Existentialist," just to see ifI'm learning anything solid. I should also add that the Heidegger connection is not my own discovery. Another of my predecessors at St John's, Eva Brann, has pointed out the Heideggerean roots of Merrick's philosophy in the course of publishing numerous articles on the Raj Quartet. After one of our study group meetings, Beate Von Oppen was telling me about how the Raj Quartet found its way to St John's. "I was the first," she said, in her part German and mostly British accent. "Then Eva eclipsed me." In the scholarly literature on the Raj Quartet, no one has yet made the Heidegger connection, so St John's is ahead of the curve on that one. One scholar did notice similarities with Jean-Paul Sartre, so I will have more to say about Sartre later. 17 �But first, Heidegger. Heidegger defines the term "Situation"6 as "definite factical possibilities" that are disclosed when a person becomes resolute. This is the fourth passage on the handout. The only thing you need to know is that "Being-There" (Dasein in German), is Heidegger's special word for human being: the kind of beings that are "there" in a fuller, more fundamental way than animals or things are "there." And yes, the Peter Sellers movie "Being There," which some of you have seen, is a reference to Heidegger's theory. The novel by Jerzy Kosinski that the film was based on (the novel was also called Being There) was a parody of Heideggerean existentialism. Here is the fourth passage on the handout: In the term "Situation" ("situation"-'to be in a situation') there is an overtone of a signification that is spatial. ... [S]uch an overtone is also implied in the 'there' ofDasein [Being-There]. Being-in-the-world has a spatiality of its own .... Dasein 'makes room' in so far as it factically exists .... Just as the spatiality of the "there" is grounded in disclosedness, the Situation has its foundations in resoluteness. The Situation is the "there" which is disclosed in resoluteness-the "there" as which the existent entity is there. It is not a framework present-at-hand in which Dasein occurs, or into which it might even just bring itself. Far removed from any present-at-hand mixture of circumstances and accidents which we encounter, the Situation is only through resoluteness and in it. 6 Heidegger, Being and Time, trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson (New York: Harper and Row, [1927] 1962), p. 299 (pages cited refer to the marginal pagination, i.e. to the original German text). The German for the capitalized English "Situation" is Situation, for small-case "situation," Lage. Emphasis in original. 18 �The inauthentic grasp of a Situation is that a Situation is a "mixture of circumstances and accidents" that we encounter. When Merrick says that most people prefer to think of Situations as part of a general drift of events they have no control over, he refers to this inauthentic grasp. Merrick's term "unreal," as in "drifting in ... an unreal direction" corresponds to Heidegger's terms "inauthentic" and "ungenuine" (Heidegger, p. 297). For Heidegger, our understanding of historical significance results from resoluteness. What does he mean by resolute? We resolve on a course of action, we make a decision, a resolution (like a New Year's resolution), and we stick to our decision, come what may. The resolute individual has made an unalterable decision-oddly, for Heidegger, a decision without grounds. Ordinarily, we let the facts determine what we should resolve to do. We work within the framework of possibilities permitted us by facts. Heidegger reverses this: rather than letting the facts determine what we should resolve to do, "[r ]esoluteness does not first take cognizance of a Situation and put that Situation before itself; it has put itself into that Situation already. As resolute, Dasein is already taking action" (Heidegger, p. 300). Such taking action exposes for the first time the "facts," or as Heidegger would say, the "facticity" with which a person must work. "The resolution is precisely the disclosive projection and determination ofwhat is factically possible at the time." (p. 298; emphasis in original) Analogously, Merrick emphasizes "enactment" as the only way of knowing the facts about what the historical situation is. Enacting this particular situation-Merrick means playing at master and slave-is the way to understand its significance. Ordinarily, we might want to examine the facts first: are brown people really the slaves of whites? Is Merrick really Hari's master? But no (Merrick and Heidegger say) disclosing facts like those always presupposes a stance, a decision you have made, a resolution. In modem parlance, this Heideggerean idea has trickled down into our ordinary speech and way of looking at things: we call it "commitment." How you view the facts depends on your prior commitment. The Liberal commits himself to finding the races equal; when he examines 19 �the evidence, he finds it supports his commitment. The racist commits himself to finding the races unequal; when he examines the evidence, he finds it supports his commitment. In the Existentialist philosophy, the prior decision lights up the world, reveals the facts for the first time. There are no pure or uncommitted facts. Ordinarily, Merrick says, the significance of Situations is "never seen until long afterwards because people [have] been afraid to act them out." And later: "It wasn't enough to say he was English and I was Indian, that he was a ruler and I was one of the ruled. We had to find out what that meant." (Scorpion, p. 298) Now we are in a position to think more about Merrick's radical new concept of guilt: that we should all admit guilt precisely for those things we're not responsible for. For Merrick, accepting responsibility is the inner truth of taking action, or enactment. Hari ought to take responsibility for the rape of Daphne, even though he didn't commit it, because the rape of Daphne by some Indians somewhere is symbolic of the situation in which all Independence-minded Indians and all liberal whites everywhere conspire to create: the liberal whites by their egalitarian behavior are practically assuming that Hari can have their womenfolk; and Hari, by acting in kind at their invitation, is practically assuming it too. The real situation (in Merrick's view-and we have already seen the evidence for his view) is that no black man can touch a white woman without feeling the sense that he is violating her. Their sexual union must always be a rape, even if neither party wills it to be such. The best Hari can do is face up to this situation. The same sense of guilt or responsibility is also the inner meaning of resoluteness for Heidegger. Resoluteness is defined as the "self-projection upon one's ownmost Being-guilty . .. " (Heiqegger, p. 297; emphasis in original). Guilty of what, for what? Merely guilty-primordially so, Heidegger says. " 'Being-guilty' also has the signification of 'being responsible for' ["schuld sein an"]-that is, being the cause or author of something. . . . These ordinary significations of "Being-guilty" ... can go together and define a kind of behaviour which we call 'making oneselfresponsible' ..." 20 �(p. 282; emphasis in original). Conscience proclaims us guilty, and conscience is the manifestation of care or of solicitous, concernful being in the world. Whenever we care for or feel solicitous toward other people or things, we feel a call of conscience which does not have a specific grounding in any act we may or may not have committed. Heidegger's (and Merrick's) notion of guilt now becomes slightly more plausible. Particularly when we suddenly realize that we have been carelessly accepting a situation made by others, i.e. not exercising our human freedom, we feel guilty. Ifwe realize we have been drifting with the current (remember, the liberal members of the raj were letting themselves drift), we suddenly feel guilty; if we then use that guilt to become resolute, to say, I'm not going to drift anymore, I'm going to be a free chooser, and make my own way in the world, then we are close to becoming resolute the way Heidegger wants us to. Close-but we're not quite there yet. For this is the truth aboutfacticity, i.e. the set of facts (sex, height, biographical givens, social roles, customs ingrained in us by our peculiar sect or nationality): none of these facts were acts of our own free will, we made none of them but rather are stuck with them, and we are seemingly determinedbv them. We are "thrown" into them, and our natural mode is to get lost in them, not to exercise our determining freedom. But herein lies the rub: there is no evidence we can ever get free of them. There are no facts, prior to making a commitment, that show us that we have free will. On the contrary, the facts all add up to show us that we have no free will, that the only choices we make are really predetermined for us by our genes or by the way our moms brought us up or by the things our dads told us. Merely rebelling against our mom or dad is no escape: then you're simply reacting against them and letting them determine you in a way equal, but opposite, to the way they would have determined you directly. The only way in which we can get outside of the facts that determine us is to make them our own. Admit responsibility for them, admit guilt precisely for facts not of our own making. That is the only way out. Step one: come to admit that you are totally indebted-to your sect, your nation, your genes-feel these facts as debts, things lacking. 21 �Realize you are a nullity, a nothing. Step two: take responsibility for these facts (even though they are not your fault), make them my own, make them your fault. Heidegger calls this "Being-the-basis of a nullity" (p. 283). "Being-a-basis" means never to have power over one's own Being from the ground up (p. 284). In understanding the call of conscience, in taking responsibility, Dasein listens "to its ownmost possibility of existence. It has chosen itself' (p. 287; emphasis in original). A Heidegger scholar has ventured an example: existential guilt is indebtedness to culture (among other factors), his example is: being brought up feminine.7 A woman may feel she has no possibilities she can truly call her own: every role is preordained for her by the culture. To have none of one's own possibilities is to be a nullity. However, she can take over these public, pre-scripted roles in her own way, making them her own. She achieves this by accepting responsibility for them, thereby becoming the basis for (i.e. the author of) her own nullity. Embrace your nothingness. This is the only way out. This is an exercise of freedom-the only freedom open to you or her or anyone. In much the same way, Merrick wants Hari to accept responsibility for the facts that make him what he is: black, dependent, inferior, coddled by a white elite, attracted to a white girl-a rapist whether virtually or actually. This is the only freedom open to him. When Hari "fails" to live up to this freedom, Merrick claims he has more contempt for him than ever. Hari is merely pretending the world does not exist (Scorpion, p. 304). Now before getting back to the story-line-we will get back to it soon: ifthe "poetry-asserts-nothing" people in the audience can stay awake just a little longer-we will visit one more philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre, whose more popular, not to say vulgarized, rendition of Heidegger's ideas helps make them easier to understand. There 7 Dreyfus, Hubert L., Being-In-The-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1990). 22 �is in fact no evidence that Paul Scott had read (or read about) the philosophy of Heidegger. "But there it is," you will say, "that is just what we were worried about: you have dragged in a philosopher to distort a literary text, a philosopher the author didn't even read." Yes, but: there is evidence that Paul Scott read and grappled with Jean-Paul Sartre. In fact, Scott devotes several pages to wrestling with what he explicitly calls Sartrean "engagement" with the "historical situation" in an important non-fiction essay in which Scott explains why he writes at all. 8 So even though Sartre is not mentioned by name in the Raj Quartet-it would have been anachronistic since Being and Nothingness first appeared in 1943, too late for the 1942 Indian milieu in which Merrick gives voice to its major tenets, Scott himself was reading Sartre in the 1960's and ?O's when he was writing the Raj Quartet, and he made the ideas a part of his art. In addition, the same ideas were around even in 1942 albeit in a more thoroughgoing, and less popular, form than Sartre's. Heidegger's Being and Time had been first published in 1927 and republished in 1935. It will probably remain forever a matter of debate what influence, if any, Heideggerean existentialism wielded over the rise of Nazism and fascism in Europe. But Paul Scott, Heideggerless or not, was smart enough to see that a philosophy that was Left-wing in Sartre, could just as easily be Right-wing as it had been in Heidegger, and so he made Merrick into a kind of British fascist. To claim even more for him, Paul Scott's power of imagination was so great that he often extrapolates from Sartre, happening upon formulations that seem to owe more to their original source in Heidegger, in much the same way that the Greekless Shakespeare took liberties with North's translation of Plutarch, making changes that coincided with the original meaning. 8 Scott, "Literature and the Social Conscience: The Novel," in Paul Scott's collected lectures and essays: Shelley C. Reese, ed,, My Appointment with the Muse. Essays, 1961- 75 (London: Heinemann, 1986). 23 �Quickly Sartre. Jean-Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness provides concrete examples where Heidegger was studiously abstract. For both Heidegger and Sartre, human being has no fixed essence but only an existence: a "standing out" (Latin: ex stare), hence the term "existentialism." Humans "stand out" from the way things "are" in favor of the way things might be. Heidegger calls it "projecting possibilities." Sartre emphasizes the negative; he calls it "nihilation": annihilating the actual in favor of the possible. Both Sartre and Heidegger seek a way out of the determinism inherent in the assumption that man's nature is essentially fixed, and that he is part of a causal chain. While Heidegger thinks the resolute individual can add nothing but a style or manner to the role which history has prescripted for him or her (all you can do is "make it your own"), Sartre by contrast holds that man has "absolute freedom," albeit sometimes within very narrow bounds-precisely the bounds of the historical situation. 9 A master and a slave have very different facticities. One seems to have unlimited scope of freedom, while the other seems to have little scope at all. Sartre would not disagree. But within these vastly differing scopes, the .freedom that both master and slave can exercise is absolute. No one forces the slave to continue being a slave: he can resolve to make a break for freedom, risking death, at any time he chooses. He may, of course, not succeed, but the choice will have been his own in a way precisely equivalent to the way his master's choices are his own. Even if escape turns out to be impossible, his freedom to make the attempt was absolute. The "Situation" restricts the range of his choices, but it does not so pre-determine the outcome of the choice or choices left to him as to vouchsafe to him foreknowledge of this outcome. Here is the crucial part: the slave can never know his escape attempt is doomed until he has made the attempt, i.e. committed 9 Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology, trans. Hazel Barnes (New York: Philosophical Library, 1956), especially pp. 6- 35. 24 �himself. The one, absolute choice that we all have, that remains no matter how strict our circumstances, is the choice whether to commit suicide or go on living: to be or not to be), but that one choice is absolutely free. So for Heidegger, there is basically no such thing as freedom, while for Sartre, freedom is absolute. One more example: consider a man who wishes to climb a rock but says, "That rock is unclimbable." His statement exposes him as the kind of being who attempts things, like climbing. That is, he projects possibilities out ahead of himself("! might be able to climb the rock."). Otherwise put, the man mentally "annihilates" the unclimbed rock-he imagines it as climbed. That is, he negates the unclimbedness of the rock. Now, the true fact about the rock's unclimbability can never be known until the man actually resolves or decides to attempt to climb the rock. Resolutely trying, he may fail, but whether he succeeds or fails, he will have exercised his human freedom. If he were to decline to climb the rock on the grounds that he somehow "knows" in advance that the rock is unclimbable, he would be in what Sartre calls "bad faith." Only in resoluteness can any such "fact" about the rock be disclosed (Sartre, pp. 482, 488-9). Now, I promised that Merrick's philosophy would have explanatory power: that it woald give a reasonable (if existentialism can be called reasonable) accounting to Hari of the problems Hari has been experiencing and thinking about since he came to India, or at least since he fell in love with Daphne. And so it does. Merrick claims that if Hari will only take responsibility for the rape, Hari's whole situation will be revealed to him, and he will at last understand it. In this Merrick turns out to be correct. When asked in his later prison interview whether he might indeed have tried to take advantage of Daphne sexually, Hari confesses (Scorpion, p. 250): 'I may have done for all I know. My behaviour at that time left a lot to be desired.' 25 �'I'd forgotten how to act in that kind of company. Or ifl'd not forgotten, trying to act as I remembered I should act seemed-artificial.' Hari was half-way to being an Indian, or half-way to being his stereotype of what an Indian was. We recall that Daphne herself admitted that Hari had to get mad and grab her wrist, get rough, throw her cigarette away by force, in order to find strength enough to break the taboo against interracial touching. Hari's confession that he might indeed have tried to take advantage of Daphne sexually is corroborated by what actually occurs in their first and only sexual union, in the deserted Bibighar garden the night of the political unrest. As Daphne herself recounts, Hari cannot initially act out or "enact" their union as anything other than the very rape which the taboo says their union must be (Jewel, p. 417, emphasis added): There was nothing gentle about the way he took me. I felt myself lifted onto the mosaic. He tore at my underclothes and pressed down on me with all his strength. But this was not me and Hari. . .. [H]e made me cry out. And then it was us. "But this was not me and Hari"-the sentence is important, because it shows that Daphne does not wish to believe for a moment that Merrick's racial situation is in fact all-determinant here. But our novelist is toying with just how close to being correct, if not entirely correct, Merrick is. Daphne's assertion that this was not the real Hari sounds like-or takes the form of-a characteristically pathetic rationalization by a white girl who has fallen in love with an Indian only to find herself taken advantage of. Hari and Daphne are in a communal vacuum: he because he is a black Englishman whom Englishmen shun, she because she is crossing the color line. Paul Scott wishes to show 26 �just how difficult it is to create a sense of self beyond these racial selves that their communities have constructed for them. After the "real" rapists leave them, Daphne in her delirium thinks she is alone, having "this idea that Hari had gone off with them because he had been one of [the rapists]." The communal ideology is strong enough to make Daphne subconsciously adhere to the scenario for which Merrick asks Hari to take responsibility. Like Daphne, Hari accepts Merrick's version of the situation-for a few hours. Merrick pretends during the interrogation (a policeman's trick) that Daphne went ahead and incriminated Hari. Merrick offers to let Hari confess to a lesser charge and avoid punishment for rape, for surely he can prove that Daphne agreed to meet him, that she wanted him? Merrick is correct in his assessment of how Hari will feel at Daphne's betrayal. Hari later realizes to his humiliation that he actually believed Merrick was telling the truth and that Daphne had given evidence against him. But we the readers know that Merrick's lie corresponds to a kind ofreality. Daphne did betray Hari in her mind, however briefly. Just as Daphne had believed, briefly, that Hari was one of the rapists, so Hari, for a few hours, believed that Daphne, as an English girl, would consider him, an Indian, one of the rapists. And, we know as well, their sexual union was a rape, if only for an instant. It all fits into a seamless "situation." After more torture, Merrick offers Hari water and helps him drink it. Then Merrick tells Hari if he were honest he would admit he was grateful for the water and would thank Merrick for it. He gives Hari another drink. "'After a bit I heard myself say [thank you]'" (Scorpion, pp. 300-1 ). Merrick says they both "know" where things stand now. In other words, by enacting the situation of master and slave, Hari has learned something about himself, just as Merrick said he would. Enactment is disclosive. During the night, Hari wakes up and calls for help. '"The name I called was Merrick.'" Only because Merrick is no longer in the cell with him, no longer there to "help" the dependent Indian, does Hari have time to reason things out. Hari first decides to 27 �confess to the rape charge. That is the attractive course because he could add thereby something of his own to his enemies' attempt to destroy him. Destroying himself would be the only course left in which he could "exercise his own free will" (Scorpion, p. 302). He is now at the level of Sartre's suicide: to be or not to be. Then Hari comes once again to realize his own nothingness. "I thought, well anyway what's going to be destroyed? Nothing. An illusion of a human being .... [A] nonentity ...". Hari now has the two principal components of Sartre's existentialist philosophy: free will and nothingness. When Hari finally revolts against Merrick's Situation, it could easily seem to the reader that Scott has taken pains to show the victory of liberalism or humanism over the existentialist philosophy of the situation. For example, Hari in his prison cell comes to the realization that (Scorpion, p. 302; emphasis in original): ... no one had any rights in regard to me. I was the only one with rights. . . . I wasn't to be categorized or defined by type, colour, race, capacity, intellect, condition, beliefs, instincts, manner or behaviour.... So who had the right to destroy me? Who had the right as well as the means? The answer was nobody. I wasn't sure that they even had the means. This reads as a classical liberal, modern vindication of the rights-bearing self. It would be easy to assume from this that a rights-based liberalism here wins out over Merrick's existentialism. But it is only in and through an existentialist engagement with the situation that Hari achieves this vindication of his own rights and individuality. He asserts: "[T]he situation about Hari Kumar was that there was no one anywhere exactly like him. So who had the right to destroy me?" Part of his reasoning is as follows: "I saw ... something Merrick had overlooked. That the situation only existed on Merrick's terms if we both took part in it. The situation would cease to exist if I detached myself from it" 28 �(Scorpion, p. 303). Hari has realized that the master-slave dialectic needs a slave: that is why Merrick has been so motivated to reduce him to slavery, so that Merrick himself can be elevated to mastery-what he regards as his proper position. Take away the slave and you take away the master-slave situation. But when Hari says Merrick's situation ceases to exist, he does not intend that no Situation of any sort exists any longer. On the contrary: Hari refers to "the situation" many times throughout his prison interview, endorsing the concept in his own right and without irony, sometimes infuriating his interrogators with his mystifying assertions about what ''the situation" is and what it entails. When they try to prevent him from talking about the situation, Hari says that it is impossible for him to forget the situation (Scorpion, p. 283). He says (Scorpion, p. 292; emphases added): ... you begin to see that I am the least important factor and that without intending to you're asking questions about what I call the situation. That's why you're annoyed and accuse me oflying, because the situation threatens to be more than any conscience can cope with. Hari's silence, his refusal to participate in Merrick's version of the situation, not only incriminates him but also contributes to the prosecution of the five other prisoners innocent of the rape in the Bibighar garden. When this is pointed out to him, Hari replies: "Yes, I had to consider that. It was part of the situation." When Hari's testimony is finished, he notes with irony that the clerk had been sent out of the room during the part that incriminated Merrick. He suggests, "That's part of the situation too, isn't it?" (Scorpion, p. 305) Hari has been converted to existentialism by Merrick lock, stock, and barrel. He merely disagrees with Merrick over what the situation is. Or rather, Hari' s resoluteness subjectively discloses a situation different from the situation disclosed by Merrick' s 29 �resoluteness. Let us look closer at the situation as disclosed to Hari. He finds the tin mug that Merrick gave him water out of. He puts a towel around his middle, covering his naked, lacerated body. He walks up and down his jail cell, holding the tin mug. Like his Hindu grandfather, who had become "sannyasi"--disavowing all responsibilities in his old age to take up a beggar's cup and go out into the world to acquire merit-, Hari now reminds himself of the "good Indian" his relatives·have been trying to make him become since his return to India. The idea of sannyasa-the disavowal of all responsibilitiesconnects for Hari with the idea that Hari is not answerable to anyone but himself: since he has no responsibilities, no one has any claims over him. "No one had any rights in regard to me." He comes to a decision to be silent, confessing nothing. Hari vindicates his existential freedom: "it seemed like a way of proving the existence of Hari Kumar .. "(Scorpion, p. 303; emphasis added). It is crucial to see here that Hari does not truly become an Indian. ("I don't know whether that made me a good Indian," p. 303). He, an Englishman, does not appropriate Indian values such as sannyasa in any direct or simple way. Rather, he takes from sannyasa only what he needs and only what the historical situation permits him to take. His appropriation oflndian cultural values is momentary, transient, and opportunistic, and it takes place in and through a Liberal philosophy of rights that is not Hindu but comes from John Stuart Mill and the tradition Hari learned in England. Nevertheless, the existentialist would say that Hari' s appropriation of Indian cultural values is as authentic or genuine as it could be: the situation disclosed to Hari what there was to appropriate, and he appropriated it. Well, I'm almost done. But here, at the end of the lecture, we have come to what I consider to be the core of the Raj Quartet's philosophical concerns, and what Paul Scott admits in his lectures and essays is his philosophical purpose in writing the kind of "moral dialogue" that we have been reading here. (I should stress that the wording of the following questions is my own wording, not Scott's wording, but I claim they are his 30 �questions.) Can someone from one culture genuinely come to understand and embrace the people and place of another culture, or must members of one culture always appropriate "the other" in a mode determined by the culture they come from? That is to say, can Daphne really embrace Indianness and understand it? To what extent does a culture constitute (and therefore determine) the self that belongs to it, and to what extent is the self free for self-fashioning? Remember that one culture, one community is about to abscond: time is running out on the raj. A legion of characters in the novels we have not examined find themselves suddenly without roles when their society absconds. Scott portrays characters struggling to find a core of moral agency or individuality in themselves that has not been constructed for them by their history. That is, they seek a self that is properly their own. They struggle to come to terms with the sheer extent of moral determinism that comes of their involvement in a great historical process (the retreat from empire and the Indian Independence movement). Only through historical theory can they explain their conundrums to themselves and to the reader. The Raj Quartet presents several such historical theories (I have concentrated on only one.) Paul Scott elsewhere expresses distaste for the historicist philosophy of history known as existentialism. He clearly was ambivalent about it, since existentialism contributed to the moral depravity of Merrick. Yet it also contributed to the existential freedom of Hari. Somehow despite his distaste for it, existentialism spoke deeply to Paul Scott when it came to the philosophic wonder implicit in the questions he posed. 31 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data paper Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 31 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History and Existentialism in the <em>Raj Quartet</em> Description An account of the resource Typescript of a lecture delivered by Paul Ludwig on November 5, 2004, as part of the Formal Lecture Series. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ludwig, Paul W. (Paul Walter), 1963- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2004-11-05 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make an audio recording of my lecture available online. Make typescript copies of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make typescript copies of my lecture available online." Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource Scott, Paul, 1920-1978. Raj quartet Existentialism in literature Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Ludwig_Paul_2004-11-05 Friday night lecture Tutors https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/b8804c1112e284fa3fc7f105c055d8aa.mp3 cb10610c5c9d716b94cc88ac1be031ce Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>.  <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a> or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context formallectureseriesannapolis Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data wav Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 01:09:31 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History and Existentialism in the <em>Raj Quartet</em> Description An account of the resource Audio recording of a lecture delivered by Paul Ludwig on November 5, 2004, as part of the Formal Lecture Series. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ludwig, Paul W. (Paul Walter), 1963- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2004-11-05 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make an audio recording of my lecture available online. Make typescript copies of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation at the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make typescript copies of my lecture available online." Type The nature or genre of the resource sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp3 Subject The topic of the resource Scott, Paul, 1920-1978. Raj quartet Existentialism in literature Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LEC_Ludwig_Paul_2005-11-05_ac Friday night lecture Tutors https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/706308a041a7fe3ef90d39e2885f1f6e.mp3 7cbe760ed8f180759b58116a36a91ca1 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Lecture Recordings—Santa Fe Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Meem Library Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data M4A Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:49:18 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Socratic Philosophical Legacies: Creating Philosophers of the Future Description An account of the resource Audio recording of a lecture given by Anne-Marie Schultz on December 13, 2024 as part of the Dean's Lecture & Concert Series. The Dean's Office has provided this description of the event: “I will examine portions of two Platonic dialogues, the Theaetetus and the Phaedo. I argue that they deal, either explicitly or implicitly, with the social and political complexities of preserving Socratic philosophical legacy. To be sure, each of these dialogues is more often associated with other important philosophical themes. The Theaetetus explores various definitions of knowledge and challenges to them. The Phaedo addresses arguments for the immortality of the soul and challenges to it. At the same time, these dialogues also explore philosophical legacy. By examining passages from these dialogues, we can gain insight into the ways that Plato aimed to create philosophical community in ways that would nurture philosophers as they carry the legacy of Socratic philosophical practice into the future. I end by asking what we can learn from the historical back drop in which Plato wrote these dialogues that may help us cultivate philosophical practices in our various communities in such a way that might safeguard the intellectual freedom of America’s current contemporary landscape.” Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Schultz, Anne-Marie, 1966- Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-12-13 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online. Type The nature or genre of the resource sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp3 Subject The topic of the resource Plato. Theaetetus Plato. Phaedo Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SF_SchultzA_Socratic_Philosophical_Legacies_2024-12-13 Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/051f52e3f98af53bd78db75da4e901ca.mp3 3b11a26ffae7864601dc0660154fb731 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Lecture Recordings—Santa Fe Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Meem Library Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data MP4 Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:57:42 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Snakes in the Mahābhārata Description An account of the resource Audio recording of a lecture given by tutor Patricia Greer on June 28, 2023 as part of the Graduate Institute Summer Lecture Series. The Graduate Institute has provided this description of the event: “’When all this was without light and unillumined, and on all its sides covered by darkness, there arose one large Egg, the inexhaustible seed of all creatures. They say that this was the great divine cause, in the beginning of the Eon…’ (I(I)26-27) So begins the bard who will recite the entire Mahābhārata as he himself heard it recited at a twelve-year Snake Sacrifice in which black-garbed brahmins chanted hymns to lure all snakes into the flames of their sacrificial fire. Thus the world’s longest poem starts with the enigma of a great egg that lies below the cosmic waters in the kingdom of divine/demonic oviparous Snakes.” The lecture begins about 12 minutes into the recording. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Greer, Patricia Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2023-06-28 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online. Type The nature or genre of the resource sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp3 Subject The topic of the resource Mahābhārata Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SF_GreerP_Snakes_in_the_Mahabharata_2023-06-28 Graduate Institute https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/8d237e8587b761599e6526a73b801830.mp3 6afdf7941983b58561ae3921db530fea Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's College Lecture Recordings—Santa Fe Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Meem Library Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data M4A Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 00:54:47 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Challenge of Heidegger's Approach to Technology Description An account of the resource Audio recording of a lecture given by Steven Crowell on April 26, 2024 as part of the Dean's Lecture & Concert Series. The Dean's Office has provided this description of the event: “Of all the writings Heidegger published after Being and Time, “The Question Concerning Technology” (1950) is surely the most widely taught and discussed. It is not hard to understand why. Since 1950, our dependence on technical devices, and the environmental consequences of technological manipulation of nature, have only become more oppressive, and Heidegger’s essay provides an intuitively powerful expression of the uneasiness we feel. All the same, the text is one of Heidegger’s most obscure, and so it is not easy to assess what Heidegger says about technology and his stated hope of establishing a “free relation” to it through a “thinking” that is other than philosophy. How should we take the measure of a kind of thinking that seems to shun traditional measures like reason and logic for one that has been forgotten since the time of Parmenides? This is the challenge of Heidegger’s approach to technology.” Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Crowell, Steven Galt Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Santa Fe, NM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-04-26 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online. Type The nature or genre of the resource sound Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource mp3 Subject The topic of the resource Heidegger, Martin, 1889-1976. The question concerning technology. Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SF_CrowellS_The_Challenge_of_Heidegger's_Approach_to_Technology_2024-04-26 Friday night lecture https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/93d7a32f9ef643413482ff195f24c92a.pdf 84300c9d102bb0657a9758e6cfff8f91 PDF Text Text Thursday, November 14, 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication What’s So funny about a dead seagull? Musings on The Seagull’s Opening Night TREPLEV: Today, I have done something despicable— I have killed this seagull. I lay it at your feet. NINA: What’s the matter with you? (Picks up the seagull and looks at it). TREPLEV: (After a pause) Soon, in the same way, I shall kill myself. When Jack Huntley delivered this line as Treplev in The Seagull last Saturday night, he had the audience in hysterics. In fact, the whole play was like this— actors often had to wait 2 or 3 seconds for laughter to die down before continuing their lines. How could this be? It’s a story full of unrequited love, unfulfilled dreams, narcissism, regret, and depression— it even ends with a suicide. Yet Chekhov called it “A Comedy in Four Acts”— and it was received on opening night with genuine laughter. Why? Chekhov’s play, directed by Margaret McConnell (’25), centers around the variously depressing lives of four characters: the embittered older writer Trigorin (Arel Foster, ’25), the tortured younger writer Treplev (Jack Huntley, ’25), the self-absorbed retired actress Irina (Jordan Kammeyer, ’25), and the young and ambitious actress Nina (Sadie Lewin, 27). Each of them deals with their own personal tragedies throughout the play, alongside several equally troubled secondary characters. When I emerged into the FSK lobby after the play, I was tickled to discover that much of the post-show discussion was not about the performance itself—it was about the audience. Why did we laugh? people asked. Was it right to laugh at such depressing scenes? Was it supposed to be funny? Was it a tragedy? Was it a comedy? What’s going on?! “I think the audience was wrong,” Avery Bravo (’26) told me. “There were moments when people definitely shouldn’t have been laughing.” For her, one such moment was the scene with the dead seagull. I, on the other hand, did laugh at that scene— but I didn’t really know why. Was I wrong? Is the audience ever wrong? I’m not sure. If people laugh at something, surely it Continued on page 2 Vol. II Issue VII Printed Thursdays in Annapolis College History Task FOrce Report: An Overview, Part One The history and legacy of the College exist for most members of the St. John’s community in a mist of halfremembered facts, lies told on admissions tours, and the odd plaque commemorating soldiers or Francis Scott Key hanging around campus. Because of this, it is understandable that for some, it feels like the College exists, or at least should exist, in an ahistorical void, where inquiry can be pursued without the burden of time and space. However, the longer I spend at the College, and the more I read about the College’s history, the more I recognize the vital importance of understanding our place in history to any intellectual pursuit, and that pretending to not think about the College’s past is, in effect, choosing one interpretation of it and its significance to tacitly support. In particular, legacies of slavery and discrimination leave a stamp on communities to this day, and the College’s impact on the communities around it has been too long ignored. For this very reason, the Board of Visitors and Governors, sparked on by Adrian Trevisan, put together a task force four years ago to examine the history of the College. Its work has finally come to fruition in the form of a report recently distributed to the College community, which features a general history of the College, biographies of all the men after whom buildings on campus are named, and an architectural survey. By examining these histories together as a community, we will be able to avoid stumbling unthinkingly into a certain interpretation of the legacy of the College, and instead be able to make an active choice, with proper thought and discussion, about what our responsibility is in commemorating the history of our institution. The taskforce is calling for comments on the report in order to encourage this kind of conversation, and to make recommendations to the Board of Visitors and Governors about steps the College can officially take to remember its history. The full report, which everyone should read, a discussion guide, and a form in which to submit comments may be found online at sjc.edu/chtf. However, recognizing that some people may not have the leisure to read the entirety of the report, I will provide here some extracts from the section on the individual men, which is the focus of the task force. This Week in Seminar However, these lack some important context present in the original report and are not a replacement for it. Rather, I hope to make the report as accessible to the largest number of members of the community as possible, to ensure that the conversation about our historical legacy is well informed and includes the whole Polity. Hector Humphreys (1798-1857) Hector Humphreys was born in Canton, Connecticut in 1797, near his cousin John Brown, the abolitionist who led a raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Humphreys attended Yale College, after which he moved to New York City to pursue theological studies. He was admitted to the order of the Deacon in Trinity Church, New Haven on March 21, 1824. Humphreys was appointed Professor of Ancient Languages at the newly established Washington (present day Trinity) College at Hartford, and his success at that institution made him a promising candidate for president of St. John’s College. Hector Humphreys served as the principal of St. John’s College from 1831-1857, and he is credited with recovering the college from the financial struggles it faced in the early nineteenth century. Many of the organizational changes that Humphreys made had a lasting impact on the curriculum and campus at St. John’s. During his time as principal, Humphrey placed a greater emphasis on science and established a laboratory for research purposes. He made military training voluntary and split the preparatory school into two sections, the Grammar School and the English School. The Grammar School served those who aimed to attend college, and the English School was for those who did not. Humphreys also led the department of “Moral Science” and covered the Greek and Latin departments due to limited faculty. In addition to his adjustments to the curriculum of St. John’s College, he also raised funds for the construction of a Boarding House which was completed in 1837. This building, now known as Humphreys Hall, was intended to relieve crowding in the College Building, present-day McDowell Hall. In 1855, Humphreys encouraged the Board to expand the campus again with the addition of faculty housing and Continued on Page 2 Upcoming Events: Freshman: Thursday, November 14th: Plato: Phaedo, 57A–84B Monday, November 18th: Plato: Phaedo, 84B–118B Sophomores: Thursday, November 14th: Plotinus: (selections) Monday, November 18th: Augustine: Confessions, I-V Juniors: Thursday, November 14th: Preceptorial Monday, November 18th: Preceptorial Seniors: Thursday, November 14th: Preceptorial Monday, November 18th: Preceptorial Friday, November 15th Friday Fare: Cannoli and Berries, FSK Lobby, 4pm-5pm Saturday, November 16th Listening Session of Original "Theatre of Turmoil" Soundtrack, with Composer Zachary Konick, Conversation Room, 2pm4pm Energeia’s Open Mic Night, Boathouse, 9pm- 12am Friday Night Lecture: "Aristophanes' Clouds and the Power of Logos" - Stephanie Nelson Page 1 �Thursday, November 14, 2024 St. John’s Collegian Should Society Be Harmonious? Socrates says that the ideal republic is harmonious, and this has become a common image in political thought. People form a city like notes form a chord. But Zuckerkandl taught me a new word, an alternative to harmony: polyphony. So, extending the metaphor, could a polyphonic society be better than a harmonious one? Harmony and polyphony are two forms of multitoned music. Harmony is “melody plus accompaniment.” The melody is in charge, and the alto, tenor, and bass lines are for the sake of it. Sure, the harmony has some power to change the ‘vibe’ of the melody, but for the most part it is subservient to the laws the melody sets down. The biggest of these laws is rhythm—every part in a harmonic piece will sing the same words at the same time. If this were a city, it would be hard to see the backup parts’ individuality, and even harder to imagine them free. Polyphony is the opposite. The parts sing different melodies at different times, and there is no one leader that dominates the piece. Each part gets its time in the sun, and once that time is done, the part steps aside to make room for another. With no eternal ruler, polyphony is more democratic than harmony. Moreover, each part in polyphony is unique and whole. In Sicut Cervus, the sopranos give us one musical idea, the altos another, and so on. Unlike in harmony, in polyphony every part can rightly be called individual. This makes polyphony truer to human nature. I am not my neighbor transposed a fifth up—I am someone else entirely. When I join a society, I want this fact to be recognized, my me-ness to be affirmed. It would be easy to take this line of thought too far, though. ‘Let me do and say whatever I want!’ But a society built on this idea would be like a song made of a dozen different chants all playing at once. No matter how good each may be on its own, when they all come together they create “nonsense [and] disorder.” Absolute freedom is unmusical. This is why, in polyphony, each part’s “right of selfassertion” is constrained by duty to the song. Every part shares the same key, time signature, and lyrics. They strive for the same end, coming together in one chord on the final syllable. These constraints elevate the piece to something beautiful. They also create the circumstances that allow glimpses of harmony to appear. But these glimpses come about naturally, like a murmuration of sparrows, rather than by the melody’s strict command. Vol. II. Issue VII Hector Humphreys Profile (continued) a new dormitory. Humphreys argued that fair compensation included staff housing and adequate dormitory space, believing such benefits would attract a higher standard of teachers to join the faculty, leading to an increase in enrollment. According to the 1840 census, Humphreys housed one free African American man and woman while living in Annapolis. Historic records do not indicate that Humphreys enslaved any individuals. El’ad Nichols-Kaufman Aphorism of the Week Οὐδένες ὁμοιότεροι τῶν ἀλλήλοις μαχομένων. Tarik Mahmud So which city is better, the harmonious or the polyphonic? I know I would choose the latter. I think the former image, much like cell-state theory, is a friend of tyrants (but if you want to hear more about that, let’s talk face to face). But regardless of which city you would choose, I hope this encourages you to be intentional with the images you use. Because if we understand these metaphors and use them with care, we will know what kind of community—what kind of world—we want to live in. Cast and Crew of Anton Chekhov’s The Seagull Henry Haggard What’s So Funny About a Dead Seagull? (cont’d) must be funny—especially in a theater. Who is a better judge of comedy than the audience itself? But, of course, it’s not all up to the audience. Director Margaret McConnell was expecting some laughs. She reminded me that Chekhov himself considered the play a comedy, albeit with some very tragic themes. It’s certainly not a comedy in the Shakespearean sense. “I guess you would call it dark humor,” said McConnell. “I think part of what can make something funny is the tragedy that goes along with it.” She ultimately wanted to preserve this balance of comedy and tragedy, keeping a bit of both. Until opening night, McConnell didn’t know what would get laughs: “As often happens in comedies, when you’ve been practicing a show for weeks and weeks, you forget that things are funny,” she said. “[The actors] found the audience laughing at things we’d never laughed at in rehearsals, and they would change the way they delivered certain lines, because they knew it would get a laugh.” In this way, the audience does influence the show environment— for better or worse. There were some truly poignant moments during the second half of the play which felt lost on an audience primed for comedy— for instance, Nina’s reunion with Treplev, or old Sorin’s lament of his unfulfilled dreams. “I wanted to get married—” he said, “and I never got married. I always wanted to live in town— and here I am ending my life in the country, that’s all.” Quiet little tragedies such as these fell through the floorboards on opening night: the audience just wasn’t prepared to take them seriously. They are sad things for me to write. Yet when I saw them, I laughed. How strange. “It is not a complete farce at all,” says McConnell. “We are laughing at Treplev, but at the same time we can understand his pain. We can relate to him.” In her opinion, to present the show only as a comedy would miss its depth. Some of it is meant to touch us in a different way. And then, of course, there is the final scene: Treplev’s suicide. After four acts of laughter, the play ends on a decidedly tragic note. Irina presides over a card game, laughing and talking loudly about herself. The other characters, worn out by life’s disappointments, distract themselves with cards and music. When Treplev shoots himself offstage, they even laugh, thinking that the gunshot was a bottle of ether exploding in the doctor’s bag. This final moment encapsulates much of the play’s mystery for me: is it a tragedy or a comedy? Is it a suicide or a bottle of ether? Chekhov answers the second question in the last line of the play: Treplev really does kill himself. What are we to make, then, of his subtitle, “A Comedy in Four Acts”? After the final scene, the audience walked into the lobby unsure of whether to laugh or cry. Aristotle writes in the Poetics that “comedy aims at representing men as worse, tragedy as better than in actual life.” (1448a) So, which is the Seagull? Insofar as its characters are ridiculous, melodramatic, narcissistic, and absurd, it is a comedy. We laugh because they are worse than us. But perhaps the tragedy appears in those few moments when we see them as something more— something better than us— or maybe, even, when we see in them something of ourselves. Helen Wagner Page 2 About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more in-depth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting! Submissions for news articles should be between 400600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjca.collegian@gmail.com with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at eanicholskaufman@sjc.edu. Contributors for this issue: Helen Wagner, Writer and Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Henry Haggard, Writer El’ad Nichols-Kaufman, Writer Tarik Mahmud, Greek Aphorism � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, November 17, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 7 of the St. John's Collegian, published November 17, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-11-17 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueVII_2024-11-17 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/570cfc731adb730e7e664c3d219943f3.pdf 5736f8fc6dc29dc7fbb76dd99ce8ea59 PDF Text Text Thursday, October 31, 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication From the polity Attention: Mathematical Discovery Dear Math Community, Ms. Benson’s senior math tutorial (MCD 34, T,R,F 910:20 a.m.) has discovered a new mathematical point! On our quest to construct a pair of Lobachevskian parallel lines, we found ourselves spending some time in Appendix II (manual pg. 86). Well on our way to complete this construction, we stumbled upon an ultra-parallel line springing forth from our illustrious point Q, perpendicular to our representative line VW, the patriarch of our family of ultra-parallels. We were astonished to find that such a foundational line concluded in an unnamed, and presumably unnoticed, point. We realized in this moment that our discovery came with a responsibility: we had to name this point. Here’s how it happened: one of your very own peers, Ms. Gennadiou, braved the board. All watching with amazement, she boldly declared, “I will name this point S”. To which, Ms. Benson suggested that we use a Greek letter. Everyone agreed, it was a fantastic idea, the Greek-ness of our point would surely make it stand out from the rest. Ms. Gennadiou quickly adjusted: “I will name this point δ because it kind of looks like an s.” There were no objections. Our class is like a math machine. I am sharing this news with a dual purpose. Firstly, if somebody could alert whoever is in currently in charge of math in this country, we could coordinate a time to receive our award. Secondly, we have reason to believe that there may be another unnamed point lurking somewhere in this diagram. Fear not— we are working diligently to find it— but if your class happens to beat us to it, please, again, alert whoever is in charge of math in this country. Really, it’s your civic duty. Adieu, M(athematician). Chloe Niedzielski Vol. II Issue VI Printed Thursdays in Annapolis Curating the SJC image Enrollment Committee Strategizes Against Dropping Application Rates Institutes of higher education throughout America are being challenged to prove their value to upcoming generations, and St. John’s is no different. Over the next few years, the country is facing a demographic cliff; the number of students graduating high school who are applying to college is significantly lower than in the past. More critically, the attitude of American young adults towards higher education is undergoing a distinctly negative shift. Students no longer recognize the cost and commitment of a college degree as worthwhile for their career and development, and those who do see value in a college degree gravitate towards large state schools and STEM programs. As a result of this, small liberal arts colleges, and humanities programs in general, are struggling. And for a school as uniquely dedicated to the liberal arts as St. John’s this issue is becoming ever more pertinent. As one of two undergraduate representatives to the Board of Visitors and Governors, I had the opportunity to sit in on the Enrollment Committee report during the board meeting this past weekend. The Enrollment Committee has recently been reconfigured, subsuming the Retention Subcommittee that formerly reported to the Visiting Committee. The board remains committed to increasing the college’s retention rate, but the focus of the Enrollment Committee will prioritize more rigorous strategies for marketing and admissions to address the decline in applicants which is predicted over the next few years. Already, this past year has seen a smaller freshman class than is desired, and the school is faced with the question of how to find new and creative ways to market St. John’s to prospective applicants who already express an affinity for the program and its values. Part of the marketing strategy involves a general push to spread awareness both locally and nationally about St. John’s and the Great Books Program through appearances in the news, podcasts, and publications. It also involves more modern approaches to marketing through social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok. The admissions team is seeking ways to draw in students with affinities for certain aspects of the program. This Week in Seminar This includes targeting sources related to our studies at St. John’s, such as advertising on subreddits for topics including Greek and Roman Mythology, Literature, History, and Philosophy. There are also efforts to market to students through pop culture references, such as Percy Jackson or Harry Potter. These marketing efforts pose an important question about what kind of public image will best communicate the spirit of St. John’s to a generation of students increasingly unfamiliar with our model of education and increasingly more involved in popular culture and social media. These efforts to reach a widening audience necessitate making important choices about who we are and how we can best express ourselves to the outside world. The marketing strategies that target students with particular interests must also make assumptions about what kind of students will enrich our communities and classrooms. The content we put out on social media, the messages we spread through our advertisements and programming, and the platforms that we choose as media for spreading awareness of our institution all impact how we are seen by the world and who we draw to St. John’s—and it seems to me that these choices will have a significant impact on who we are as a college in the coming years. Though the job of crafting our public image lies with the BVG and the professionals responsible for marketing and admissions, the necessity of increasing the visibility of St. John’s provides an important opportunity for us as students to reflect upon the image that we hope to share about our beloved college and the community of which we are a part. How do we capture the complexity of our community and program in a way that draws people in who will enrich our school and inspires upcoming generations to recognize value in the education that we provide? What might our responsibility be, as students and future alumni, to advocate for the continued growth and prosperity of our college and community, and spread an inspiring image of ourselves in the country and the world? If you have any further questions about this issue or the recent meeting of the Board of Visitors and Governors, please reach out to me (Catherine Greer) or Millie Ransohoff! Catherine Greer Upcoming Events: Freshman: Thursday, October 31: Plato: Republic, VIII–IX Monday, November 4: Plato: Republic, X Sophomores: Thursday, October 31: Bible, Acts of the Apostles Monday, November 4: Bible, Gospel of John; First Letter of John Juniors: Thursday, October 31: Preceptorial Monday, November 4: Preceptorial Seniors: Thursday, October 31: Preceptorial Monday, November 4: Preceptorial Friday Night Lecture: "Know Thyself in Dialogue with Others: A Case for Cross-Cultural Philosophy" - Bret Davis Page 1 Friday, November 1: JOC’s 90’s Kick Back, Boathouse, 9pm—12am Saturday, November 2: Masquerade Waltz, Dining Hall, 9pm Poets in the Conversation Room - Remica Bingham-Risher, Conversation Room, 2pm Monday, November 4: Monthly Music Mondays - "Sicut Cervus", Great Hall, 9:30pm—10:30pm Wednesday, November 6: Life Skills 101: Creating a Routine for Success, Student Health and Wellness Center, 12pm �Thursday, October 31, 2024 St. John’s Collegian NOTES FROM THE BVG MEETING Proposed Amendments to the “Polity” Document In the Board of Visitors and Governors meeting this past weekend, discussion was held over amendments to a document called the Polity. This Polity, not to be confused with our term for the polis of our campus, functions as the principal governing document for the College and is reviewed every five years by the Board in consultation with our tutors. It was instituted during the change to the New Program in 1945 and is intended to represent the core values and aims of the College. As such, any amendments or changes to this document are incredibly relevant to our life on campus. Why do we do what we do here at St. John’s, and how should that be codified into a constitution-style document for Board members and the campus at large to follow? The preamble to this 35-page document reads in part that “St. John's College strives to illuminate the common heritage of humanity in a persisting study of the great documents in which that heritage can be found. It is concerned with the unity of knowledge, an understanding of the great issues, and the moral foundations on which men and women may conduct their lives.” With these goals in mind, the Board’s Polity Review Committee has proposed various amendments and a general restructuring of the entire document. If passed, this will be the most significant change to the Polity since its adoption in 1945. Originally the Board intended to vote on these amendments at this past weekend’s meeting, but this has been delayed until their February session. Until February, then, we as a Polity have time to consider what the Polity is and ought to be, in both senses of the term. While the proposed amendments are not yet publicly available, the current iteration of the Polity document is freely accessible on the College website and quietly serves an essential role on how our campus is structured. It is important to note that we as students do not make this decision. We do not have a vote in the amending process, and as four-year Polity members who are not directly responsible for the fiscal and general upkeep of the College there is an argument to be made for this arrangement. Yet, these decisions do impact our beloved campus and our education, and with that in mind I ask my beloved Polity to keep itself familiar with the amendment process as it happens and stay in touch with this Johnnie constitution. Reagan Bottomley Aphorism of the Week Τῷ ναύτῃ κυμαίνει ἡ ξηρά. Tarik Mahmud In Memory of Eva Brann 1929-2024 Eva Brann, beloved SJC alumna, dean, and tutor emerita, passed away on Monday, October 28 at the age of 95, after more than 60 years of serving this college. The following is an excerpt from a lecture she gave in 1967 called “The Student’s Problem.” (The problem in question is “melancholy.”) “I cannot resolve this, the problem of my lecture and the question in my mind. I herewith hand it over to you, without, of course, myself relinquishing it. The study of the liberal arts, which are public and adequate learning procedures, and of their fruits, which are the various bodies of knowledge, as well as the absorption of the reflective tradition which is based on them, can only provide materials, tools and a language for questioning; the love of wisdom itself cannot be gained by study; and for that portion of our life of learning in which our unknown source fails us— for it is more arduous to maintain the condition of openness than a state of levitation— we must expect to be sometimes prey to the mortal’s malady, the confusion of the soul induced by the futile passing of precious time. But in this understanding of that sickness there is implicit the suggestion of a cure: to fix stubbornly and determinedly on that present preparation, that acquisition of the problem-solving arts and the problem-posing tradition, which is certainly at least a pre-condition of a questioning life, a life worth living.” The full lecture transcript is in the library. Rendelman Rundown A New Intramural Sport: Goaltimate Frisbee Three weeks ago, we saw a change to our intramural sport line-up. Now that every team has completed round robins in all three sports, Ultimate, Outdoor handball and Soccer, there has been one major change and two minor. Beginning with the minor changes, Soccer is being played primarily on the lower field and handball has moved indoors. The lower field is slightly larger than the upper field, which does not have a huge impact on the games, but is a factor to consider. Handball moving indoors makes the court smaller and dribbling a more consistent part of the strategy. Now onto the major change: Ultimate Frisbee has been replaced by a new frisbee game—Goaltimate Frisbee. In short, Goaltimate is like the half-court basketball of Frisbee. There are four players on the field from each team (two A-team and two B-team), subbing is continuous, and the game is divided into forty-minute halves. There are a few things that I believe to be crucial to a successful Goaltimate game: well-executed subbing and accurately placed players. Goaltimate is a fast-paced game that ultimately involves less running and is more accessible than Ultimate frisbee. With the A-team and B-team aspect of our program it is important that the captains place players accurately. When done right, it creates an even matchup and more fun play. However, with fewer on the field at a time there are less play opportunities than with Ultimate and thus there is a lot of down time. But despite the subbing struggles, increased down time, and A and B team discrepancy, the overwhelming polity opinion tends positive towards Goaltimate. Perhaps a suggestion, next year let’s start with Goaltimate and work our way towards the more difficult Ultimate Frisbee. Goaltimately it was a successful Goaltimate experiment. Vol. II Issue VI About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more in-depth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting! Submissions for news articles should be between 400600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjca.collegian@gmail.com with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at eanicholskaufman@sjc.edu. Contributors for this issue: Above: Danny Ma (Greenwave, ’26) makes a throw. Below: Elena Molinar (Guardian, ’27) celebrates a goaltimate score. Photos by Lainey Rendelman. Helen Wagner, Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Reagan Bottomley, Writer Catherine Greer, Writer Tarik Mahmud, Greek Aphorism Lainey Rendelman, Writer Chloe Niedzielski, Writer Lainey Rendelman Page 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, October 31, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 6 of the St. John's Collegian, published October 31, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-31 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueVI_2024-10-31 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/e7caf51156c7581613b15b3232f4f524.pdf 823c4c03044e9fba18bcf9136f34a88e PDF Text Text Thursday October 24 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication From the polity: Echoing Whispers of a Succession Crisis? Nestled behind Humphreys Hall and beside the Greenfield Library stands a building shrouded in mystery and myth. This labyrinth of passageways and hidden chambers guards secrets untold, yet some echoing whispers threaten to break free from their brick-walled confines. The gnomes of Paca are growing restless. Venerable guardians of the underquad, they have long concealed its second entrance under the floorboards of this maze-like palace. The gnomes are a quiet people. They wish for nothing more than to aid the Lady of the Underquad, the peaceful mediator between the overquad Johnnies and the mystical underquad realm below. Yet the Lady of the Underquad has not yet chosen a successor, and the gnomes fear the day when the throne sits vacant and silence hangs over the kingdom. If she were to leave the Underquad without a ruler, the very quad may well crumble into the oblivion below. Still, there is hope! The Lady of the Underquad has met with the gnomes and promised to crown an heir well before the final Sicut is sung. Yet selecting a successor is no easy task, and the future of the Underquad must be secured. Having calmed the fears of the gnomes, the Lady of the Underquad has turned to me, Herschel P. Reuben. I am not and shall never be her heir, but I will gladly serve as a reporter to the polity. My duty is to make known the presence of the Lady of the Underquad to the Polity at large, and urge them to keep alive these true stories of St. John’s. For stories are indeed the fragile heart of a community, the flickering candle of life and love. Herschel Reuben UPCOMING SCI FORUM Courtesy of the Student Committee on Instruction Oct. 30th: What if my class is DEAD? WEDNESDAY. 11:45. PRIVATE DINING ROOM. Free lunch for off-campus students! Vol. II Issue V Printed Thursdays in Annapolis Paper Or Plastic? Or: How I Fixed Seminar The college is terminally ill with a disease with no name. While its symptoms are observed by many, no solid diagnosis has yet been identified, nor any course of treatment devised. I thought myself safe, until the Psalms seminar revealed unmistakable signs of that illness in me. Others commented after the fact how intolerable I was: hardly ever shutting my mouth, talking over others, putting down their ideas, and refusing to entertain any but my own; the evil Johnnie incarnate. That behavior is antithetical to who I am, so whatever could be the cause? After much contemplation, I happily discovered that I was not the problem. There’s no doubt that sharing one’s thoughts in seminar can be a traumatic and high-stakes environment. The room goes silent and stares at you while you monologue into your book, or swivel your head around, scanning the room for sympathetic eyes. There are none. They all hate you and think you’re stupid. People cope with this differently. Some don’t risk the pressure and never speak. Others feel obliged to defend themselves at all costs, and do so, terrified that if they don’t self-advocate, they and their ideas will be thrown overboard and sink to the bottom of the discourse. The ship of seminar has a helm carved for many hands, and even so, there are people trying to seize it for themselves. Dear reader, the cause of this is not simple verbosity in the culprit, or their lack of social awareness, or even their boorishness. This behavior bears the mark of that very terrible illness, what I call Affinity for the Self. With many faces around the seminar table, all speaking and trying to get their ideas across, it is easy to associate one person’s face with their idea. Think of how fond we all are of what proceeds from ourselves, as a parent is for their child. It’s only natural for us to be defensive of our ideas—so long as we know they’re ours. If you follow the logic, the cure is anonymity. Through a well-placed bag over the head, the speaker is disguised from others, and from themselves. The ideas permeating the natural fiber- or petroleum-derived membrane, like souls through the Lethe, are deprived of an explicit connection to their speaker and thereby freed. My theory had to be tested, regardless, and I found the second Tacitus seminar to be the perfect laboratory. As we discussed Rome’s readiness to willingly submit to tyrannical proceedings, I despondently noticed an This Week in Seminar immediate relevance to my seminar’s situation. My peers were the senate, squabbling under the Caesar of the self. I, crowned with a Whole Foods grocery bag, was Cremutius Cordus, ostensibly persecuted but truly free of soul. Without a face to associate my speculations with, my peers had no choice but to name them the product of their collective thought. The kraft paper, filtering my words, even seemed to alter me. I was completely unaware of the things I was saying, and therefore unable to develop that pernicious, arrogant attachment to them. Seminar was liberated for the small price of ten cents. Following this small victory, I naturally want to apply myself to the study of the other utilities of bag-wearing. I am presently writing under the hood of a plastic freezer bag, which, despite its proclivity for fogging up, protects my fragile brain from pesky Lucretian semblances threatening to interrupt my concentration. The sparing supply of oxygen leaves something to be desired, but I am finding myself increasingly capable of impressive quantities of work before I start hearing colors. Could such blessed garments find utility in other places, perchance intramurals? I hazard a yes. An influx of sports-related injuries may soon find their relief in the humble insulated grocery tote. Outside of cushioning cranial impacts, they would prevent the players from seeing where they’re going, likely preventing them from undergoing injurious behavior in the first place. Goodwill would return, which was often lacking in these games, by making it near impossible for any team to win. The sooner these teams stop trying to prevail over one another, the better for the college and its purported egalitarian mission. I leave you, dearest polity, with the exhortation to see this invaluable garment universalized. If not advocating it to college leadership, you would do well beginning the change in yourselves. Johnnies would be philosophers in the truest meaning of the word, once more pursuing truth together in a spirit of collective insight, abolishing the holding of some that seminar is an event to be won, where one camp of ideology must prevail over the others. Farewell! Jacob Sharpe Upcoming Events: Freshman: Thursday, October 24: Plato: Republic, IV 427D–VI 502C Monday, October 28: Plato: Republic, VI 502D–VII Sophomores: Thursday, October 24: Bible, Matthew Monday, October 28: Bible, Luke Juniors: Thursday, October 24: Preceptorial Monday, October 28: Preceptorial Seniors: Thursday, October 24: Preceptorial Monday, October 28: Preceptorial Saturday, October 26th: Guest Lecture: Goya’s Theatre of Cruelty Conversation Room, 6pm to 7:30pm - Reality’s Halloween Great Hall, 9pm Wednesday, October 30th Resume Writing Workshop Studio Theater, 5pm Friday Night Lecture: Gregorian Choir of Paris Page 1 �Thursday, October 24, 2024 St. John’s Collegian CLUB SPOTLIGHT: PROJECT POLITY Vol. II. Issue V Squirrel :) An Interview with Kurtis Bleakley, Archon What’s your history with Project Polity? I started coming during my freshman year. At the time, Luke Briner was the archon. It means something to me that there’s a service community here — a volunteering group that takes what we learn about virtue here and acts upon it in the world. Why is service important to you? I did a lot of volunteering in the past–I taught ESL for a while and gave food to the homeless— and it always struck me in a very moving way how kind people are to you when you help them. There’s this intense connection. In some ways it’s ineffable What’s your relationship to service as a Johnnie? I think of the Greek arete—virtue and character— and how Aristotle puts it in the Ethics. Virtue is practice. It is involved with continuing and furthering yourself. Leibniz even speaks of this too— perfect things becoming more perfect. So, there’s this overarching motif, I guess, between certain texts, of how we can become better human beings. How has your involvement with Project Polity affected your academic experience? When I read, I find myself more attuned to how philosophies can help the world. Certain texts are very abstruse, very metaphysical, but the question that always percolates in my mind is: how can we use this to help others, or how can this affect the quoteunquote “real world” as opposed to the life of the mind? I think that’s a common refrain here, but for me it’s more epitomized when we do stuff like tutoring, cleaning up trash, and so forth. What have you read recently that you liked? This is off-program, but this summer I read a book by David Brooks called How to Know A Person, where he talks about the art of conversation and listening, which I thought was very moving. On-program, I really do love the Ethics. I really like Leibniz and Spinoza and their sense of one-ness. The Irish poet David Whyte has this quote about the conversational nature of reality and I wonder if, the more we read here, the more we see that all things are interacting With each other. How do you think St. John’s does in engaging with the greater Annapolis community? I think we really could expand ourselves. I’ve had many beautiful intellectual conversations with people outside of St. John’s—I talked to a waitress the other day and she had a doctorate. I think there are more opportunities to bring St. John’s students out into Annapolis, and Project Polity is one of them. What would you say to people who haven’t come out to a service project yet? I hope this doesn’t come off as selfish, but I really do think that volunteering is good for you as an individual, and for your mental health. Having positive thoughts about your day and seeing your ability to help someone is very good for you. When we go out tutoring, you can see the effect we have on these children. It’s very moving to see how you can help them become better readers and mathematicians. In Meno, the slave boy didn’t do the mathematical work by himself: Socrates engaged him in conversation. We’re taking things like that and bringing them out into the real world. What projects are coming up? We have a semester food drive on November 2. If you want to help with that, please email me or accost me in the hallway. Later, we’ll also be making trash cans for dog poop by the creek. We might also organize a 5k in the spring. And we do weekly tutoring with the Stanton Center’s after school program. Interview by Helen Wagner Email Kurtis at kmbleakley@sjc.edu. Aphorism of the Week i take 1 taste i must make haste der may be dangers i haf to face mouf full of food mus not be rude ders not a seed i havent chewed da seeson change da weather strange so preperations i must arrange i look around survey da ground for spot to hide dis meal i found still on alert i dig da dirt a littol deeper it cannot hurt i stand up high pawz to da sky i thank saint john for pumkin pie Vivian Miyakawa PLEASE MAKE SUBMISSIONS TO Ἄνθρωπος ὁ ἄρχων ἄρχοντος ἄρχει τοῦ ἀρχομένου. SJCA.COLLEGIAN@GMAIL.COM Tarik Mahmud Annual Security & Fire Safety Report Every year, the College is required by federal law to release a security and fire safety report covering the previous year. These reports include, aside from a detailed record of safety procedures on campus, a record of all the crimes reported on campus, and all alcohol and drug related violations dealt with as campus disciplinary referrals. This year’s report, issued September 30th, covers incidents in the 2023 school year. About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more in-depth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. In general, the report shows similar numbers to last year, with a reduced number of almost all crimes and violations relative to high peaks in 2021. No particular incidents requiring clarification occurred in 2023. The report, which was emailed to the entire Polity and can be found in a physical format in the Public Safety office, features more in-depth data, but you will find here collected tables of the most frequent categories of crimes and violations across the past ten years, collected from several previous reports. The report notes that the high spike in 2021 comes from officers being “more diligent in documenting violations of college policies,” than in previous years, as well as residual effects from the pandemic. oh golly gee pumpkin 4 mee outside on steps is lovely treet Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting! Submissions for news articles should be between 400600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjca.collegian@gmail.com with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at eanicholskaufman@sjc.edu. El’ad Nichols-Kaufman Page 2 Contributors for this issue: Helen Wagner, Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Tarik Mahmud, Greek Aphorism Vivian Miyakawa, Poet El’ad Nichols-Kaufman, Writer Herschel Reuben, Writer � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, October 24, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 5 of the St. John's Collegian, published October 24, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-24 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueV_2024-10-24 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/08c854df34b8834a1143fb6799c36e26.pdf cbeca516505fdd9b5067a22efd1ba305 PDF Text Text Thursday October 10, 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication From the polity Are You Registered to Vote? On Friday, September 20th, one eighth of the polity registered to vote and requested their absentee ballots for the November 5th election. On that day, Reading Women ran a simple voter registration drive, made up of three sophomores with laptops, a pile of stamps and envelopes, and a homemade document of all the links to register to vote or apply for an absentee ballot from any of the 50 states. Sitting at a commandeered table in the FSK Lobby in the after-class rush, striving to outcompete the Friday Fare, I was thrilled to find that in just two hours, we helped almost 50 students make a plan to vote. In part, I was surprised, having always thought of our campus culture as aloof from the rest of the world. Kept busy with demands like seminar readings and papers, it can be easy for us to forget the obligations we have to our greater community. But when those responsibilities look you in the eye with a handwritten “voter registration drive” sign and a smiling face, it’s incredible how eager Johnnies are to make a difference in this election. After helping students from New Jersey to Georgia to California, I was reminded that, of course, our polity cares about our community; they just needed a little nudge. So, if you didn’t see our humble voter registration drive, here is your nudge. Presidential, congressional, and local elections are all happening on Tuesday, November 5th. But voter registration deadlines are coming much sooner. If you have never voted before, you must do this either through your home state or in Maryland, with those applications being due as early as the first week of October. Depending on your state, you may be able to do this online, or you may have to mail in an application. To ensure your right to exercise your voice in this election, take care of this as soon as possible. If you don’t plan on traveling home on a Tuesday to vote, you also need to apply for a mail-in ballot, which most states will happily send you, given enough notice. Because you will be dependent on the efficiency of the USPS, I highly encourage you to apply for these even sooner. I’ve attached a QR code (page 2) for the document linking the applications for voter registration and absentee ballots for every state. For those from Maryland, the state requires that you vote in your district, so if you can’t make it home, you too should apply for an absentee ballot. If you aren’t from Maryland but would like to vote here, the state allows you to use your dorm address as a residence. (continued on page 2) Vol. II Issue IV Printed Thursdays in Annapolis MOVE Over, PALESTRINA Shape Note Singing Brings New Tunes to Pendulum Pit Last Saturday afternoon, harmonious music filled the pendulum pit and drifted down the empty Mellon corridors. This time, though, it was not Sicut Cervus. In fact, it was not polyphony at all. It was more raucous than Ave Verum, rawer than Beatus Vir, and louder than any Sicut sing Mellon has ever heard. The voices sang not in Latin but in English, in four-part harmony: When Gabriel’s awful trump shall sound, And rend the rocks, convulse the ground, And give to time her utmost bound, Ye dead, arise to judgement. The song seemed to echo like the mountain hollows of Appalachia. Who was singing it? What could it be? This style of music is called shape note singing, a centuries-old tradition that Mr. Stoltzfus has recently helped introduce to St. John’s. He hosted the first sing on campus last month, and another last Saturday (Oct. 5). The singers were a mix of johnnies and nonjohnnies, old and young, from experienced singers to total newbies. I (a newbie) showed up to sing, then hosted an impromptu interview with several of the singers afterwards, including a St. John’s alum. Now, I’m here to share the music with you. Shape note singing has a unique notation style. The notes of the scale are represented by four different shapes which correspond to different musical syllables: rectangles (la), triangles (fa), diamonds (mi), and circles (sol). Each shape denotes two different intervals on the scale, except for mi, which is always the seventh. The singings are arranged similarly to our Wednesday Sicuts: the four voice parts face each other sitting in a square formation, with the leader in the middle. Leadership rotates around the room, with everyone getting the chance to choose and lead a song. When I first sat down in the alto section, I had no idea what I was doing. Someone handed me a Shenandoah Harmony songbook, someone else gave a pitch, and everyone began to sing. At first, they sang the syllables: fa la sol mi. They went through the song once this way, sightreading the note shapes, then sang it again with words. “This is a method of singing to teach basic music theory principles and get everyone up to speed as fast as possible,” RB Bartgis (A09) told me later. “So, you can sing a piece in four-part harmony with basically no rehearsal.” Collegium in 2005. “The first time that you sit in the square and have the music hit you is really amazing,” they told me. This year, they and Mr. Stoltzfus decided to bring that feeling back to St. John’s. RB loves the contrast of shape note singing with the music we study here: “This is not something you’re gonna find in the St. Matthew Passion,” they joked. Not only are the harmonies based around different intervals from baroque and classical music, but shape note singing is also never a performance. “We’re singing for ourselves and each other and it’s really in the moment,” said Susan Green, who’s been singing since the 70s. She met her husband Richard at a shape note group in grad school. “I sing in choirs,” Richard said, “and other groups where there is more musicology applied, and more performance. But I love this, because it’s different. You sing full-throated. The harmonies are beautiful. It supplements everything else I do.” Despite the musical differences, shape note singing reminds me of our Sicut sings: we sing for each other, facing inwards, enjoying the music for its own sake without the thought of an audience. And it brings us together. One word came up again and again during my interview: community. “Singing is really as much about that community as it is about the music,” said Thomas Ward, a DC-based singer. Susan agreed: “the community is bound together by these songs.” There is something about group singing traditions—whether shape-note or polyphony—that connects people in a uniquely beautiful way. The harmony of our voices becomes an expression of our fellowship. Our closing song on Saturday was called Overton. We all stood up to sing it, and I looked around at the people who I’d spent the last two hours making music with. Most of them were ostensibly strangers. Nevertheless, after our time together, the words of the song felt right: Brethren, with pleasure let us part, since we are of one mind and heart; No length of days, nor distant place, Can ever break these bands of grace. The full interview will be published in Gadfly issue IV. Helen Wagner Mr. Stoltzfus hopes to continue shape note singing at St. John’s, and the next session in the pendulum pit is currently scheduled for the first Sunday in November. Show up and give it a try! RB got involved in shape note singing after hearing Mr. Stoltzfus’ madrigal choir sing a piece at winter This Week in Seminar Freshman: Thursday, October 10: Herodotus: History, V, 105; VI, 48–120; VII (entire) Monday, October 14: Herodotus: History, VIII; IX Sophomores: Thursday, October 10: Plutarch: Lives, Caesar; Cato the Younger Monday, October 14: Tacitus: Annals, I-II Juniors: Thursday, October 10: Spinoza: Ethics, Book 1 (selections), Book 2 (selections) Monday, October 14: Leibniz: Discourse on Metaphysics Seniors: Thursday, October 10: Marx: Capital (selections), The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (selections) Monday, October 14: Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling, Through Problema I Friday Night Lecture: "The Ethics and Aesthetics of Sympathy in Sophocles' Philoctetes" - Professor Ellwood Wiggins Page 1 Upcoming Events: Day of the Week, Date: Saturday, October 12: Greenfield Library Annual Book Sale, 12pm to 3pm, Library patio Monday, October 14: Monthly Music Mondays - "Sicut Cervus", 9:30 pm, McDowell Great Hall �St. John’s Collegian Thursday, October 10, 2024 Seniors Save Mellon! (Almost) Exiting seminar before a long weekend is a strange experience, with a strange combination of the intellectual buzz that always accompanies the end of a good discussion and the elation of being free from classes for the next few days. Your faithful reporter was very much feeling this strange beginning of long weekend energy as he exited class on Thursday, but was quickly knocked out of it by an even stranger sight: a large pool of water on the floor of Mellon, dripping down from the ceiling. This reporter looked over at Helen Felbek, who was accompanying him at that moment, and who immediately figured out what was going on. “It’s coming from the tank room!” The two rushed up together, and after struggling for a moment to find the light switch, discovered water all over the floor, and a leaky fish tank. They set to work draining it, and were shortly joined by a pair of tutors. Your ingenious correspondent was convinced a siphon was the best way to solve the problem, and spent a good deal of time trying to get one set up, while more practically minded people present began draining it with a pitcher. Fortunately for all, tank room assistant Louis Rosenberg shortly arrived, and took charge of the situation, and the tank was safely drained. However, a small lake still remained on the floor of the tank room, and presumably therefore in the ceiling of Mellon’s first floor. The tutors quickly disappeared, and no other responsible staff member was present, leaving students with a conundrum. Indeed, dear reader, your writer himself considered abandoning the place, leaving someone else to deal with it, but the rest of the students in the room immediately set to work, taking responsibility in their own hands, and thus your correspondent had no choice but to join in. This noble band of seniors was soon expanded with the additions of Reggie Yang, Luke Widenhouse and Whitney Bixby, who assisted in scrounging around for mops, and then mopping away the flood, first in the tank room, and then on the first floor. Thanks to their efforts, mopping late into the night (10:30 pm, long past this writer’s bedtime), Mellon’s water damage was minimized, although not prevented. From this very humble writer’s point of view, there was something fulfilling about being able to get to action and actually take up a very concrete problem facing the polity in his own hands. Perhaps he, and the rest of the College, should do so more often. The sad condition of the polity continued in long music, where, once more, I was the only attendee. The tutors and (it goes without saying) the other students eschewed the musical perfection of their souls for, presumably, some baser, animalistic form of merriment, like billiards. I carried the class, having learned all four parts of Ave Verum Corpus. Do it early for peace of mind. Maryland early voting will begin Thursday, October 24th and be open for a full week. New voters can even register to vote during early voting or on November 5th, at the nearest polling location, just a short walk down West Street at 119 S Villa Ave. Reading Women will host a walk-to-the-polls event closer to election day to make it even easier. I know you have opinions about this country. I know you want to share them. This is your sign to jump through the hoops to make your community listen to what you have to say. Take this opportunity and see the good that comes of it. Delaney Costello Scan the QR code for registration applications and absentee ballots! As of October 10 DC meeting Aphorism of the Week Ὅσον γ’ ἡμεῖς οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἀπὸ τῶν θηρῶν οἰόμεθα, τόσον θὴρ ὁ ἕκαστος ἀφ’ ἡμῶν τε καὶ πάντων ἄλλων θηρῶν. St. John’s Chorus: $37.89 Delegate Council: $67.51 Energeia: $2750.99 Jazz Coalition: $250 COME TO CSL FORUMS! Courtesy of the Committee on Student Life Lunchtime discussions about non-academic student life issues. Tarik Mahmud THURSDAYS. 11:45. PRIVATE DINING ROOM. (Found on an Unspecified Seminar Room Table Monday Evening After Long Weekend) It was 9:03 AM on Friday that I knew something was wrong. No one had shown up to math, not even our tutor. Fortunately, I had prepared to demonstrate the remainder of book XII, and did so, vainly hoping that at least one of you would remember the unbreakable covenant to academics you made at convocation one short year ago. It was a productive class for me, no one was present to challenge my immaculate command of geocentrism, but I grew despondent when nobody was even there to lazily nod along as I demonstrated. Voting article, cont’d Club budget update El’ad Nichols-Kaufman A Letter of Farewell I suspected something was afoot after seminar Thursday when the comment, “See you at math tomorrow” was the cause of amusement among you people. Failing to observe the humor in a fruitful discussion of the Ptolemaic system, I did not regard it. Little did I know that such a comment would be the harbinger of a pestilence of academic truancy making landfall on this sacred campus. Vol. II. Issue IV It wasn’t easy going— my voice doesn’t go high enough for the soprano part— but persistence is the fount whence springs success. Today, I held out hopes for a renaissance of academic motivation, but to no avail. I was greatly disturbed by this sudden change in the student (and tutor) body’s newfound lack of integrity, and so had neglected my translation duties. I regret to say this, but my misstep faced no consequences, for no one showed up to language tutorial either. I see how it is now, St. John’s Polity. You carry on with your bonfires and see where it gets you. It appears absenteeism is what we’re doing now, but at least I have the common decency to let you know about it. I won’t be seeing you at seminar tonight, but something in me suspects you have no intention of going anyhow. Your Disconsolate (Former) Academic Comrade-in-Arms UPCOMING SCI FORUMS Courtesy of the Student Committee on Instruction Oct. 16th: The Algebra Exam: Does it work? Oct. 23rd: What are the rules of seminar? WEDNESDAYS. 11:45. PRIVATE DINING ROOM. Free lunch for off-campus students! Page 2 About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more in-depth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting! Submissions for news articles should be between 400-600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjcacollegian@gmail.com with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at eanicholskaufman@sjc.edu. Contributors for this issue: Helen Wagner, Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Delaney Costello, Writer El’ad Nichols-Kaufman, Writer Tarik Mahmud, Greek Aphorism � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, October 10, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 4 of the St. John's Collegian, published October 10, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-10 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueIV_2024-10-10 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/3c09f7617d26e7a3fe9586ddeb4ae765.pdf 67f09bc5d89400d19a7da5368c3eab83 PDF Text Text Thursday, October 3, 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication From the polity Robes in Seminar Printed Thursdays in Annapolis Alumni association holds meetings over Homecoming Weekend In conjunction with this year’s homecoming celebrations, the St. John’s College Alumni Association convened for a Board Meeting on Friday, September 27th, and an All-Alumni Meeting on Sunday, September 29th. Both meetings were chaired by Katarina Wong (A’88), President of the Alumni Association Board (AAB), who oversaw updates from working group leaders and officers on the past year’s initiatives. Photo by Evan Hamilton Last week, I wore an academic robe to seminar. Why did I do this? Seminar is the source and summit of our academic life at St. John’s. It is a liturgy (λειτουργία) in the original sense—a work of the people, a ritual, a public ministration. While for all other classes a certain informality is acceptable, at the seminar table it is fitting for a Johnnie to show up at the top of his game not only in his intellectual preparation, but in his raiment. In doing so he shows forth a certain seriousness regarding the task at hand, as well as a pride in himself which augments both the respect he renders and receives. We are not angels, and thus are incapable of pure intellection without the use of bodily mediation. This being the case, we do well to embrace the embodied character of seminar, specifically by dressing up. I have been proud to see the new freshman embrace this. You are a well-dressed bunch! Every blazer and long skirt I see on a Monday and Thursday evening fills me with joy. But why an academic robe? I have three reasons. First, it is traditional. Originating in Medieval Oxford and Cambridge, the academic robe or gown was first worn by scholars to keep them warm while reading during the cold British winters. Today in most places robes are Continued on page 2. Vol. II Issue III A major focus of the meetings was the new strategic plan for 2024-26. This plan seeks to enhance collaboration across the Association’s five key areas: alumni support, student support, community engagement, fundraising, and governance. By improving communication between stakeholders, the AAB aims to increase its overall effectiveness. Wong noted that moving forward, communication with alumni will be sent out tri-annually. The AAB is also encouraging more alumni to become active volunteers, offering their time and expertise to support these efforts. With the college transitioning to a philanthropic funding model, alumni engagement in fundraising has become even more critical. President Demleitner emphasized that tuition alone can no longer sustain the college’s high academic standards. Alumni contributions are essential, and Wong stressed that every donation, regardless of size, makes a difference. Hayden Pendergrass (A’14) reported that 30% (114) of first-time donors in 2024 were reached through Alumni Giving Council events. Fundraising efforts this year included Giving Tuesday, which brought in 489 gifts totaling $121,000, the Day of Giving, which raised $204,738 from 789 gifts, and the Croquet Giving Tent, which generated 175 gifts. As part of the new strategic plan, the AAB is also increasing its focus on supporting international students and introducing a senior writing period support structure. Richa Bhattarai (A’18), from the Career Services Working Group, highlighted the success of the Odyssey Program, which paired 30 alumni volunteers with 39 students for career mentoring. This year it has been expanded to include sophomores and juniors. In light of the creation of a new website called “Careers for Johnnies” the program will adopt a new approach utilizing eight wide career fields to organize resources. Demleitner empathized that this is by no means an attempt at excluding certain This Week in Seminar Freshman: Thursday, October 3: Plutarch: Lives, Lycurgus; Solon Monday, October 7: Herodotus: History, I; II 50–53, 112–120; III 37–38, 66-87 Sophomores: Thursday, October 3: Virgil: Aeneid, V–VIII Monday, October 7: Virgil: Aeneid, IX–XII Juniors: Thursday, October 3: Hobbes: Leviathan (selections) Monday, October 7: Spinoza: Ethics, Book 1 through proposition 29, marginal pages II/45–II/71 Seniors: Thursday, October 3: Marx and Engels: The German Ideology; “Theses on Feuerbach” (selections) Monday, October 7: Marx and Engels: Capital (selections) Page 1 career paths or to pressure students into specific careers. Alumni present at the meeting were particularly keen to point out the importance of structured guidance on careers in STEM and medicine. The Student and Recent Alumni Group (SARA) reported on a new project to provide diploma tubes for the graduation ceremony. SARA aims to improve messaging to avoid past confusion where their presence was misinterpreted as a fundraising solicitation. Looking ahead, the Association is preparing for its bicentennial in 2027. A special committee will be formed to coordinate the celebration. The weekend also saw changes to the AAB. Interim Board member Nani Detti was confirmed, replacing Matt Pryatel, who stepped down due to work commitments. At the end of the All-Alumni Meeting, election results for new officers and at-large directors were announced. Beth Martin (A’94) was elected Secretary, Richa Bhattarai (A’18) Treasurer, and Ginger Kenney (A’67) the BVG-Alumni representative. Newly elected and re-elected directors at-large include Hayden Pendergrass (A’14), Jacob Greenstine (A’10), Aishwarya Scharma (A’20), Charles Bieneman (SF’89), Hannah Stires Ard (A’92), Joseph Larson (A’90), and Shannon Lynch Albitton (SF’20). The Board also announced the recipients of the Award of Merit, which will be presented to Malik Gillani, Rose Carmen Goldberg, Thomas More Donnelly, and Tia Pausic at a ceremony next term in Washington, DC. The Volunteer Service Award was given to Brian Becker, Leslie Kay, and Steve Virgil. Additionally, five individuals were named honorary alumni in recognition of their service to the college: Victoria Campbell, John Cornell, retired tutor Henry Higuera, Julie Romero, and former president Mark Roosevelt. The next board meeting will take place virtually in December. Helen Felbek From The Mitchell Museum: "The biggest hindrance to wanting to understand a work of art is wanting to understand." —Bruno Munari (1907–98), Italian artist, designer, and inventor courtesy of /m Upcoming Events: Friday, October 4 Long Weekend begins Saturday, October 5: Poets in the Conversation Room: Carolyn Forché, 2pm, Mellon Conversation Room Monday, October 7: Long Weekend ends (seminars meet) �Thursday, 3 October, 2024 St. John’s Collegian A WEEKEND WITH THE RUSTY WICKETS: Homecoming’s Alumni Croquet Match Homecoming weekend started off with a bang— some alumni chose to attend the opening of the new bookstore and coffee shop in Edensword. but others ditched the formality and joined the St. John’s croquet team for practice. It was intended to be a tournament of sorts, but that quickly fell apart. Instead, alumni and freshmen were paired up and played against upperclassmen. On courts 1 and 2, current students fared pretty well. Court 3 is referred to as the party court, due to its decline and other frustrating landscaping. Magnus Oberg and Caden Marshall were placed at this court, against Rusty Wicket Sam Collins and yours truly. Collins was a truly remarkable player, getting to the alley (the opposite side of the court) significantly faster than Oberg and Marshall managed to do. This was without the aid of me, his partner, due to my inability to hit the ball. Unfortunately, Collins and the other alums left early for dinner around 6, leaving me to finish the game. While it was filled with good sportsmanship, it was evident that I need to work on my croquet skills. The Rusty wickets appeared to miss croquet in their postcollege lives—a fact made evident when they arrived on the field bright and early Saturday morning. Unlike Friday, it was a much more pleasant day to play croquet. Like Friday, it wasn’t much of a tournament, but good practice for current students and a way of connecting with alums. They seemed to get a great deal of joy out of it, most likely due to the inaccessibility of croquet outside of On Voting: A Letter from Ms. Locke St. John’s. It serves as a good reminder to appreciate the gifts we have at the college while we are still here. I’m looking forward to seeing the Rusty Wickets at the Annapolis Cup in April! Willa Rothenberg Aphorism of the Week Cold water is fleeting. Caleb Briggs Student Committee on Instruction: Wednesday Forums 11:45, Private Dining Hall. All Are Welcome! Wed. Oct. 2nd: Are the essays we write here pointless? Wed. Oct. 9th: Do we need moments of silence in seminar? Wed. Oct. 16th: The Algebra Exam: Does it work? Wed. Oct. 23rd: What are the rules of seminar? Vol. II. Issue III Seminar Robes Article, Cont’d used as sorts of secular vestments for convocation and graduation ceremonies. We at St. John’s are the New Oxford. We have inherited and preserved traditions such as Don Rags which have fallen by the wayside everywhere else, and it is incumbent upon us to not allow the distinctive garment of the learned man go the way of all flesh. Second, it is simple—in fact, simpler than usual formal attire! You can buy an academic robe on Amazon for as little as $14.98. Even if you wear it over a T-shirt and sweatpants, you will look the part of a scholar. Third, it just looks really cool. I am a strong proponent of all garments which are robe-like, traditional, and cool. Cassocks, kimonos, togas, monastic habits, agbadas, thawbs—they all fit the bill. If you find yourself in agreement with the sentiments expressed above, please join me in robing up for seminar Monday of next week (Oct. 7). Jackson Green BOOKSTORE HAIKU Bookstore in Campbell I fear'd a thing and it came No Warrior cats Nate Burke Wed. Oct. 30th: What if my class is DEAD? BUDGET UPDATE: Club Budgets Approved by the DC as of October 1 Meeting Here’s a plain question: Are you registered to vote? As college students living in Maryland, you American citizens are eligible to register here, even if you already registered elsewhere. Or you can register with your permanent address in your home state. It takes 10 minutes, at vote.org. This website links to each and every state, can give you the rundown on what will show up on your ballot, and alert you to deadlines before the November 5 election day. You will need to know your social security number and driver’s license (or state ID), depending on your state. If you think you are registered to vote, please confirm. Have you requested an absentee ballot? Go straight to vote.org. They will easily mail a ballot to you, but on-campus addresses must read: Name 60 College Avenue Annapolis, MD 41401 Please don’t put it off: your vote truly matters. Just as you have taken your education into your own hands in an intentionally (ideally) democratic classroom, exercise your right to vote. Scan the QR code for a brief video overview of the 19th Amendment. If you have questions or would like me to walk you through the process, email me at pmlocke@sjc.edu. Thanks, 3D Printing- $319 Alexander Hamilton Society- $400 Board Games Club- $325 Christian Fellowship- $363.94 Cinema Club- $1,260 Darkroom- $700 Filmmaking Club- $885 Historia- $450 Historical European Martial Arts- $2,030 Johnnies of Color- $1,855 Jiu Jitsu- $1,935 King William Players- $4,150 Law Club- $650 Project Polity- $40.28 Purls of Wisdom- $172.39 Rock Room Club- $446.44 Spanish Speakers- $500 String Ensemble- $300 Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind- $85 Video Game Club- $250 About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more indepth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting ! Submissions for news articles should be between 400-600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjca.collegian@gmail.com with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at eanicholskaufman@sjc.edu. Contributors for this issue: Helen Wagner, Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Helen Felbek, Writer Jackson Green, Writer Patricia Locke, Writer Patricia Locke, Tutor Willa Rothenberg, Writer Photo from the SJC archives, submitted by Jackson Green Page 2 Caleb Briggs, Oneiric Aphorism Nate Burke, Poet � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, October 3, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 3 of the St. John's Collegian, published October 3, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-10-03 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueIII_2024-10-03 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/6341cec057a02d5873485f6a2e130035.pdf 36783473da06d728a019add34eb4ddd1 PDF Text Text Thursday September 19, 2024 The St. John’s Collegian A Gadfly Publication From the polity A Letter to the St. John’s College Administration Concerning the Gravel Parking Lot by the Gym Dear Powers That Be, One of the great treasures of St. John’s College is our back lawn. It is simultaneously one of the most beautiful, and most frequently used parts of our campus. It is where many of us read, play sports, sunbathe, stargaze, watch the sunset, and occasionall y oil wrestle or have snowball fights. Front campus is our presentable, outward-facing, hedge-lined yard. It is there we play croquet, and generally put forward our most dignified visage. The quad is half polis agora, half back deck—the place where on Monday and Thursday night post-seminar conversations continue beyond the stamina of the tutors, and where on Friday and Saturday night quad bools continue beyond the stamina of Public Safety. But it is the back lawn which is really the most precious. It is here in the enclosed privacy of our academic cloister that we are allowed the most important condition for the study of the liberal arts—leisure. Why is this so critical? Without leisure, liberal education is impossible. Because it is not in itself a practice directed to some ulterior end—because it is not inherently ordered to being ‘useful’—the student of liberal education must have time and space which is free from the necessities of life which demand ‘usefulness’. Our lawn is such a space. It is not a place where we do ‘useful’ things—and even when we do, we could do them elsewhere if we pleased, and with fewer distractions. But because it is the chosen destination for ‘useless’ activities, it is one of our most used spaces. For us to continue our devotion to the New Program, the college lawn is indispensable. It is one of a few spaces on campus which—like our education—is primarily delightful, not functional. It is a place of freedom where the liberos made ex liberis libris libraque can come, as the American revolutionaries who gathered under the shade of the Liberty Tree came to our campus, for their own purposes and not those imposed upon them by others. It is an icon of who we are, what we do. To deny our lawn’s central importance is to deny the very essence of St. John’s College. Continued on page 2 Vol. II Issue II Printed Thursdays in Annapolis Creature Feature: Luna Moth Caterpillar Spotted It was a warm sunny day on Friday when this reporter was walking up to McDowell and an abnormally-large, bright green caterpillar crawled across the path. The caterpillar quickly attracted a small crowd of Mr. Duffy (Tutor), Ms. Sprout (A26), and Mx. Bixby (A25) as we all gawked at the hungriest caterpillar we ever did see. After a quick, tentative ID from Insect Farming Club Archon, Louis Rosenberg, it appears that this impressive creature–which continually fell on its side due to its corpulence–was a soon-to-be luna moth in its final days as a caterpillar. The luna moth caterpillar goes through five stages as a caterpillar, called “instars”–periods between molting. Judging by the size and coloring of this caterpillar, it seemed likely at its fifth instar and ready to begin pupating–spinning its cocoon. Each instar of a luna moth caterpillar can last 4-10 days which means a caterpillar can spend up to 50 days eating before spending around two weeks in its cocoon. Only after that two weeks is up, will the moth emerge fully formed. All they need to do is inflate their 3-4 inch wings and dry them out before they can take flight. Luna moths, despite their prehistoric affect and the fact that one feels lucky if they see a moth once a year, are quite common. Their range stretches from Florida to Atlantic Canada and from Louisiana to southeastern Saskatchewan. The reason they may seem rare to us is because they are nocturnal and only live about a week in their moth form. They take a page out of the cicadas’ book and emerge from their cocoons without mouths, their sole purpose to find a mate. Male luna moths have quite wonderful yellowish feathery antennae while females have slightly morespindly green antennae. Both sexes sport impressive twin tails that are a deterrent to their main natural predators: bats. Bats hunt by echolocation and the luna moth whips its tail around to scramble the sound signals they receive. Scientists have found that this tactic works about half the time. We may not see the results of this caterpillar’s pupation this year–if at all. When the temperature is cold enough and the days grow short enough, this caterpillar may enter “diapause”–a nine-month period of dormancy in its cocoon. If it does this, it will hatch This Week in Seminar Freshman: Thursday, September 19: Aeschylus: Agamemnon Monday, September 23: Aeschylus: Libation Bearers, Eumenides Sophomores: Thursday, September 19: Bible: Job Monday, September 23: Lucretius: De Rerum Natura, I–III Juniors: Thursday, September 19: Milton: Paradise Lost. IX-X; XI to 428; XII 446 to end Monday, September 23: Hobbes: Leviathan, Frontispiece; Letter of Dedication; Author's Introduction; Chapters 1–11 Seniors: Thursday, September 19: Hegel: Phenomenology of Spirit, The Beautiful Soul and Forgiveness (659671); Absolute Knowing, sections 806-808) Monday, September 23: Tocqueville: Democracy in America (selections) Friday Night Lecture: Ryan Shea, "Phenomenology of Nature." Page 1 after the seniors have graduated and all of us have gone away for the summer. After 50 days of eating and nine months of transformation, a spectacular moth may emerge and live to haunt our silent campus for seven nights. These moths are commonplace, but not of our realm. To find a moth is to find something special. To find a moth is to perhaps be forced to ask the question “was it all worth it?” To find a moth is to be told by their mouthless faces “yes.” Godspeed, you great, green, and ever-hungry caterpillar. May you soon wheel, in graceful assurance, over the heads of a pupating polity. The Caterpillar in question (quarter for scale). Caleb Briggs BUDGET UPDATE: Club Budgets approved by the DC as of September 17 Meeting Bowling Club- $1158 Catholic Student Fellowship- $900 Folk Life- $387 Insect Farming Club- $325 Jiu Jitsu- $1935 Magic Club - $719 Pangaea - $1765 Reading Women- $730.44 Reality- $3902 SCI- $975 Shammai- $815 Waltz Committee- $4160 Orthodox Christian Fellowship- $ 984.71 Continued on page 2 Upcoming Events: Friday, September 20: "Seeing--Reading--Writing: Practicing a Phenomenology of Nature" Nature Institute Workshop with Ryan Shea, 3:45pm, Mellon 134 Saturday, September 21: Raffle Trip: Maryland Renaissance Festival Sock Hop, 9pm-12am, Great Hall Thursday, September 26: Gadfly II published (no Collegian) �St. John’s Collegian ORGANIC TUTOR INTERVIEWS: Santa Fe Transfer Tutors 1. Can you introduce yourself? Ms. Dougherty: Hello. My name is Janet Dougherty. I’ve been a tutor at this college since 1992. I started at the Annapolis campus and then moved to Santa Fe. Initially, I planned to stay there for only a year, but I ended up staying longer than expected. Eventually, I returned to Annapolis, and I’m happy to be back. It’s one college and one program. Although there’s a geographic difference, the people in the classroom are the same. Mr. Pagano: Hi, my name is Mr. Pagano. I’ve been a tutor at the college, starting in Santa Fe, since 1983. This was the premier year for tutors, with 5 new ones in total. The buildings were built much later here, and so there was no library and no gym. The atmosphere is so different across the campuses as well; you don’t think about humidity until you are drenched in sweat here in Annapolis, and the Santa Fe campus is so much more spread out. But when you are in a class, it feels no different – except for the fact that classes are an extra ten minutes longer in Santa Fe. You can tell a lot of jokes in ten minutes. Nonetheless, I am happy to be back in Annapolis with Ms. Dougherty. 2. Why did you want to become a tutor at St. John's College? Ms. Dougherty: I felt tired reading secondary literature, and I often didn’t feel educated enough. I keep thinking my education is incomplete. The texts we read seem inexhaustible—40 years of reading and I still feel that I am in the process of being educated. What part of the program do you always come back to? Ms. Dougherty: I really enjoy teaching freshman seminars. It's enjoyable to see the freshmen learn. They have their own way of interpreting questions and their own attitude in the seminar. They always have some sense of how a seminar works. It's truly wonderful to observe them and see them get better at working together. Of course, I also love freshman seminar because of my love for freshman seminar books. I especially enjoy Platonic dialogues and Aristotle. I even like advising senior essays on Platonic dialogues, and always enjoy having a study group for close readings of Platonic dialogues. Mr. Pagano: For me, it really depends on how the class goes. Last year’s sophomore seminar was JUST GREAT. It is striking how students are such nice people, and they force you to level up your level of niceness. Theoretically, classes are for the students... but I want to come out having learned myself, and usually I do. Freshman and junior language can be difficult classes, but still fun if the students are engaged. The following acrostic poems were created by Ms. Dougherty and Mr. Pagano, although who created which will remain undisclosed information. Frank N. Pagano = Funny, Not Phony Janet A. Dougherty = Just And Devoted Tamar Pinsky and Seohyun Lee Aphorism of the Week As we know, like all things which are ends in themselves—the very things which make human life delightful—our lawn is the first place which those in need of space are prepared to appropriate for use. Last July, I visited our campus with my good friend, Evan Hamilton. I remember vividly the shock we both experienced upon looking out along the lawn to see it horribly disfigured by a hastily built gravel parking lot. What! When did they…? how could they…? when will it be gone? This last question remains most important to me regarding the scourge of the gravel lot. I recognize that it was a necessary scourge we had to endure while Edensword was under construction last school year. But with the Edensword parking lot now available, I ask again: how long? When will it be gone? Jackson Green Οὐκ ἔστι τῷ ποιητῇ ἑαυτὸν ᾄδειν. Tarik Mahmud Insect Sublates Hegel Seminar One Injured, None Killed ANNAPOLIS, MD. Seniors were in the midst of deep contemplation of Hegel on Monday, September 9th, when one seminar participant completely derailed conversation. No, this participant did not interrupt, nor did he bring his personal convictions on Christology to the table. Instead, his mere presence was enough to negate the focus of all members of the seminar. “After moving, it was a solid 30 to 45 minutes before I could engage in class, because of my guilty conscience,” said Kammeyer. “She looked morose,” concurred Thyer. Still, the class, including the unhappy consciousness of Reeher, admirably continued to soldier onwards, towards the Absolute. Who was this distraction, you may ask? Accounts vary, with some claiming it was a “yellowjacket,” “a paper wasp,” or, according to James Reeher, most likely a “European hornet.” After its presence distracted the progress of the class-spirit for long enough, Jordan Kammeyer decided to take action. Club Budgets, cont’d “It was more of a squish than a scoop,” opined Sarah Thyer, who also was in the seminar. “I was trying to get at it from all sides, but with minimal pressure,” responded Kammeyer. Alas, the minimal pressure was not enough. The insect, feeling it was in a lifeand-death struggle, chose to assert its certainty of being-for-itself and stung the unfortunate Reeher. At this point, the class was entirely negated, and in order to synthesize and move to the next step in the dialectic, the entire class moved rooms. Gravel Parking Lot Letter, cont’d 4. Can you improvise on the acrostic poem of your initials? 3. “I am one for seminar going on as usual despite all distractions,” she explained. “When the hornet finally landed at a prime spot to be finally dealt with, I gently tried to scoop it up with my scarf.” This prime spot, unfortunately, was the back of her classmate, James Reeher. Vol. II Issue II Original cartoon by Polina Vatralskaia (26) Thursday, 19 September, 2024 El’ad Nichols-Kaufman Swim Club- $88.44 Baking Club- $ 448.72 Gadfly/Collegian- $320.00 Coffee Club- $165.00 Rock Climbing- $3,875.00 Collegian Classifieds: CALLING ALL SMOKING (hot) JOHNNIES We Have Rabbits AND Ducks On Campus! And They Find Your Butts A Tasty Treat! (as do we all) HOWEVER They die when they snack on your leftovers, so be cool and throw your butts where they belong. Sincerely, PUFF (the M.D.) Page 2 About the St. John’s Collegian The St. John’s Collegian is the weekly newspaper of St. John’s College Annapolis. We work to bring quick and timely coverage of important events going on, to help develop a more informed student body. If you’re searching for more in-depth investigations and reporting, as well as essays, art and culture, check out the Gadfly, our affiliated publication, which is published once every three weeks. Want to submit an article? We always need more writers, whether for opinion or reporting ! Submissions for news articles should be between 400-600 words, while opinion should be kept short at 350 words. Just email sjca.collegian@gmail.c om with your article, and we will work to get it in print! Longer form articles and more in-depth exploration of ideas should go to the Gadfly, which accepts submissions at gadfly.office@sjc.edu. Contributors for this issue: Helen Wagner, Editor Jacob Sharpe, Editor Caleb Briggs, Writer Jackson Green, Writer El’ad Nichols-Kaufman, Writer Tamar Pinsky and Seohyun Lee, Interviewers Polina Vatralskaia, Cartoonist Tarik Mahmud, Greek Aphorism � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> Description An account of the resource A student newspaper of St. John's College. <em>The St. John's Collegian</em> began publication in 2023 and is affiliated with <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/16"><em>The Gadfly</em></a>. <br /><br />Published weekly on Thursday, with the exception of weeks <em>The Gadfly </em>is published. <br /><br />Earlier publications with the title <em>The Collegian </em>and <em>The St. John's Collegian </em>are available in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/collections/show/26"><em>The Collegian Collection</em></a>.<br /><br />Click on Items in <a href="https://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=69&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CDate&amp;sort_dir=d">The St. John's Collegian Collection</a> to view and sort all items in the collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, Md. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource St. John's College Greenfield Library Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data pdf Page numeration Number of pages in the original item. 2 pages Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource St. John's Collegian, September 19, 2024 Description An account of the resource Volume 2, issue 2 of the St. John's Collegian, published September 19, 2024. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.) Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Annapolis, MD Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024-09-19 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource St. John's College holds the rights to this publication. Type The nature or genre of the resource text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Subject The topic of the resource St. John's College (Annapolis, Md.)--Periodicals Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SJCCollegian_vol2_issueII_2024-09-19 Student publication The Collegian The Gadfly