Archive for the ‘ Self-Creation ’ Category

Mordecai M. Kaplan, excerpt from Judaism Without Supernaturalism

Can mere belonging to the Jewish People be a sufficient rationale for Jewish unity? Is not a definite content required?

We should not be concerned merely with belonging, but with the religious significance of belonging. That significance must be understood as involving an acceptance of one’s Jewishness as the substance out of which one’s life is to be fashioned. Modern psychology stresses the thought that it is unwholesome, and modern ethics assumes that it is wrong, to wish that the given conditions of our life were different from what they are–for example, that we had other parents, or live in another age. The religious rationale for Judaism must, therefore, be the desire to make of our Jewish heritage that which can elicit the best in us. We take a religious attitude toward Jewish belonging when we conceive it as “a way to achieve salvation,” and as consisting of “efforts to render the people to which we look for salvation capable of providing it.” 

Emily Giffin, excerpt from Baby Proof

“Why are you telling me this?” I say.

“Because of the recent choices you’ve made in your life.”

“What about them?” I ask. I know she is talking about Ben and babies, but I am not sure how it all ties in with her out-of-the-blue compliments.

She looks contemplative, as if carefully considering her wording. “I’m not the best mother in the world…I never have been,” she says slowly. “But always remember, Claudia, you are not me. You are a lot of things to a lot of people. But you are absolutely nothing like me.”

Adrienne Rich, excerpt from “Diving into the Wreck”

We are, I am, you are
by cowardice or courage
the one who find our way
back to this scene
carrying a knife, a camera
a book of myths
in which
our names do not appear.

Charles Olson, “These Days”

whatever you have to say, leave

the roots on, let them

dangle

And the dirt

Just to make clear

where they came from

Tara Westover, excerpt from Educated

To write my essay I had to read books differently, without giving myself over to either fear or adoration. Because Burke had defended the British monarchy, Dad would have said he was an agent of tyranny. He wouldn’t have wanted the book in the house. There was a thrill in trusting myself to read the words. I felt a similar thrill in reading Madison, Hamilton and Jay, especially on those occasions when I discarded their conclusions in favor of Burke’s, or when it seemed to me that their ideas were not really different in substance, only in form. There were wonderful suppositions embedded in this method of reading: that books are not tricks, and that I was not feeble.

 

Nicole Krauss, excerpt from Forest Dark

“What we’re talking about is much larger than perception. It’s the idea of self-invention. Event, time, experience: these are the things that happen to us. One can look at the history of mankind as a progression from extreme passivity—daily life as an immediate response to drought, cold, hunger, physical urges, without a sense of past or future—to a greater and greater exercise of will and control over our lives and our destiny. In that paradigm, the development of writing represented a huge leap. When the Jews began to compose the central texts on which their identity would be founded, they were enacting that will, consciously defining themselves—inventing themselves—as no one had before.”

“Sure, put like that, it seems extremely radical. But you could also just say the earliest Jewish writers were at the frontier of that natural evolution. Humanity had begun to think and write on a more elevated plane, giving people greater sophistication and subtlety in how they defined themselves. To suggest a level of self-awareness that would allow for self-invention, as you say, is assuming a lot about the intentions of those earliest writers.”

“There’s no need to assume. The evidence is everywhere in the texts, which are not just the work of one or two individuals, but a series of composers and redactors who were supremely conscious of every choice they were making. The first two chapters of Genesis, taken together, are about exactly that—a meditation on creation as a set of choices, and a reflection on the consequences that result. The very first thing we’re given in the very first Jewish book is two contradictory accounts of God’s creation of the world. Why? Perhaps because, in echoing God’s gestures, the redactors came to understand something about the price of creation—something they wished to communicate to us that, if we were to grasp it, would verge on blasphemous, and therefore could only be hinted at obliquely: How many worlds did God consider before He chose to create this world? How many scales that contained neither light nor dark but something else entirely? When God created light, he also created the absence of light. That much is spelled out for us. But only in the uncomfortable silence between those two incompatible beginnings is it possible to grasp that at that instant He created a third thing, too. For lack of a better word, let us call it regret.”

“Or an early theory of the multiverse.”

But Friedman seemed not to hear me. We stood at the corner, waiting for the light to change. Overhead, the Mediterranean sky was stupendously blue, utterly cloudless. Friedman stepped out in front of an idling taxi and began to march across the street. “Read closely enough, it’s impossible to deny that whoever composed and edited those first texts understood what was at stake,” he said. “Understood that to begin was to move from infinity to a room with walls. That to choose one Abraham, one Moses, one David, was also to reject all the others that might have been.”

Franz Kafka, excerpt from Letters to Felice, paraphrased by Susan Sontag in The Complete Rolling Stone Interview

You once said that you would like to sit beside me while I write. Listen, in that case I could not write (I can’t do much, anyway), but in that case I could not write at all. For writing means revealing oneself to excess; that utmost of self-revelation and surrender, in which a human being, when involved with others, would feel he was losing himself, and from which, therefore, he will always shrink as long as he is in his right mind– for everyone wants to live as long as he is alive– even the degree of self-revelation and surrender is not enough for writing. Writing that springs from the surface of existence–when there is no other way and deeper wells have dried up–is nothing, and collapses the moment a truer emotion makes the surface shake. That is why one can never be alone enough when one writes, why there can never be enough silence around one when one writes, why even night is not night enough.

Rainer Maria Rilke, excerpt from Letters to a Young Poet #7

To love is good, too: love being difficult. For one human being to love another: that is perhaps the most difficult of all our tasks, the ultimate, the last test and proof, the work for which all other work is but preparation. For this reason young people, who are beginners in everything, cannot yet know love: they have to learn it. With their whole being, with all their forces, gathered close about their lonely, timid, upward-beating heart, they must learn to love. But learning-time is always a long, secluded time, and so loving, for a long while ahead and far on into life, is-solitude, intensified and deepened loneness for him who loves. Love is at first not anything that means merging, giving over, and uniting with another (for what would a union be of something unclarified and unfinished, still subordinate-?), It is a high inducement to the individual to ripen, to become something in himself, to become world for himself for another’s sake, it is a great exacting claim upon him, something that chooses him out and calls him to vast things. Only in this sense, as the task of working at themselves (“to hearken and to hammer day and night”, might young people use the love that is given them. Merging and surrendering and every kind of communion is not for them (who must save and gather for a long, long time still), is the ultimate, is perhaps that for which human lives as yet scarcely suffice.

But young people err so often and so grievously in this: that they (in whose nature it lies to have no patience) fling themselves at each other, when love takes possession of them, scatter themselves, just as they are, in all their untidiness, disorder, confusion…And then what? What is life to do to this heap of half-battered existence which they call their communion and which they would gladly call their happiness, if it were possible, and their future? Thus each loses himself for the sake of the other and loses the other and many others that wanted still to come. And loses the expanses and the possibilities, exchanges the approach and flight of gentle, divining things for an unfruitful perplexity out of which nothing can come any more, nothing save a little disgust, disillusionment and poverty, and rescue in one of the many conventions that have been put up in great number like public refuges along this most dangerous road. No realms of human experience is so well provided with conventions as this: life-preservers of most varied invention, boats and swimming-bladders are here; the social conception has managed to supply shelters of every sort, for, as it was disposed to take love as a pleasure, it had also to give it an easy form, cheap, safe and sure, as public pleasures are.

Rainer Maria Rilke, excerpt from Letters to a Young Poet #8

I want to talk to you again for a little while, dear Mr. Kappus, although there is almost nothing I can say that will help you, and I can hardly find one useful word. You have had many sadnesses, large ones, which passed. And you say that even this passing was difficult and upsetting for you. But please, ask yourself whether these large sadnesses haven’t rather gone right through you. Perhaps many things inside you have been transformed; perhaps somewhere, someplace deep inside your being, you have undergone important changes while you were sad. The only sadnesses that are dangerous and unhealthy are the ones that we carry around in public in order to drown them out with the noise; like diseases that are treated superficially and foolishly, they just withdraw and after a short interval break out again all the more terribly; and gather inside us and are life, are life that is unlived, rejected, lost, life that we can die of. If only it were possible for us to see farther than our knowledge reaches, and even a little beyond the outworks of our presentiment, perhaps we would bear our sadnesses with greater trust than we have in our joys. For they are the moments when something new has entered us, something unknown; our feelings grow mute in shy embarrassment, everything in us withdraws, a silence arises, and the new experience, which no one knows, stands in the midst of it all and says nothing.

It seems to me that almost all our sadnesses are moments of tension, which we feel as paralysis because we no longer hear our astonished emotions living. Because we are alone with the unfamiliar presence that has entered us; because everything we trust and are used to is for a moment taken away from us; because we stand in the midst of a transition where we cannot remain standing. That is why the sadness passes: the new presence inside us, the presence that has been added, has entered our heart, has gone into its innermost chamber and is no longer even there, is already in our bloodstream. And we don’t know what it was. We could easily be made to believe that nothing happened, and yet we have changed, as a house that a guest has entered changes. We can’t say who has come, perhaps we will never know, but many signs indicate that the future enters us in this way in order to be transformed in us, long before it happens. And that is why it is so important to be solitary and attentive when one is sad: because the seemingly uneventful and motionless moment when our future steps into us is so much closer to life than that other loud and accidental point of time when it happens to us as if from outside. The quieter we are, the more patient and open we are in our sadnesses, the more deeply and serenely the new presence can enter us, and the more we can make it our own, the more it becomes our fate; and later on, when it “happens” (that is, steps forth out of us to other people), we will feel related and close to it in our innermost being. And that is necessary. It is necessary – and toward this point our development will move, little by little – that nothing alien happen to us, but only what has long been our own. People have already had to rethink so many concepts of motion; and they will also gradually come to realize that what we call fate does not come into us from the outside, but emerges from us. It is only because so many people have not absorbed and transformed their fates while they were living in them that they have not realized what was emerging from them; it was so alien to them that, in their confusion and fear, they thought it must have entered them at the very moment they became aware of it, for they swore they had never before found anything like that inside them. Just as people for a long time had a wrong idea about the sun’s motion, they are even now wrong about the motion of what is to come. The future stands still, dear Mr. Kappus, but we move in infinite space.

Cheryl Strayed, excerpt from “Tiny Revolutions” in Tiny Beautiful Things

Real change happens on the level of the gesture. It’s one person doing one thing differently than he or she did before. It’s the man who opts not to invite his abusive mother to his wedding; the woman who decides to spend her Saturday mornings in a drawing class instead of scrubbing the toilets at home; the writer who won’t allow himself to be devoured by his envy; the parent who takes a deep breath instead of throwing a plate. It’s you and me standing naked before our lovers, even if it makes us feel kind of squirmy in a bad way when we do. The work is there. It’s our task. Doing it will give us strength and clarity. It will bring us closer to who we hope to be.