slow reads

John field notes 14a: Mixing the modes

Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:25 -0400

praxymetry: In 1938, some months after the initial publication...

Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:31:53 -0400

In 1938, some months after the initial publication of The Hobbit, J. R. R. Tolkien and his British publisher, Stanley Unwin, opened talks with Rütten & Loening, a Berlin-based publishing house who were keen to translate the novel for the German market. All was going well until, in July, they wrote to Tolkien and asked for proof of his Aryan descent. Tolkien was furious, and forwarded their letter to his publisher along with two possible replies — one in which their question was delicately side-stepped, and one, seen below, in which Tolkien made his displeasure known with considerable style.

(Source: The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien; Image: Tolkien in 1955, via; Thanks to William Vodrey.)

25 July 1938
20 Northmoor Road, Oxford

Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter. I regret that I am not clear as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-Iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people. My great-great-grandfather came to England in the eighteenth century from Germany: the main part of my descent is therefore purely English, and I am an English subject — which should be sufficient. I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride.

Your enquiry is doubtless made in order to comply with the laws of your own country, but that this should be held to apply to the subjects of another state would be improper, even if it had (as it has not) any bearing whatsoever on the merits of my work or its sustainability for publication, of which you appear to have satisfied yourselves without reference to my Abstammung.

I trust you will find this reply satisfactory, and

remain yours faithfully,

J. R. R. Tolkien

John field notes 3c: Sequitur

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:22:23 -0500

They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? (John 6:30, KJV)

Signs blind. If you really want to see, Jesus suggests to Nicodemus, you have to lose everything, deny your birth, start over:

“Rabbi, we know that you’ve come from God a teacher since none could do these signs you do unless God is with you.”

“Jesus answered “Amen amen I tell you unless a person is born from above he can’t see the reign of God.” (Reynolds Price, Three Gospels)

Earlier in John, Jesus turns the Jews’ request for a sign into confusion, demonstrating what seeing (understanding, walking) by signs leads to. Here with Nicodemus he implies that signs will (help) keep one from seeing the way Jesus sees.

[I’m reading John’s gospel. My reactions here vacillate between notes — a list of impressions — and something less sketchy. A note on nomenclature: the note number in my post’s title indicates the chapter of John’s material I’m reacting to. A title’s letter, though, differentiates the post from earlier posts about that chapter. “John field note 2c,” then, is my third post about something in John’s second chapter. N.B.: 12a may precede 3d: I skip around.]

Photo

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:20:20 -0500

Photo

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:18:43 -0500

John field notes 3b: Non sequitur

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:15:28 -0500

This morning, “You must be born again” brings to mind Pittsburgh.

“By night” is the Allegheny. “We” is the Monongahela. One of those rivers should win out at their confluence.

But Jesus’s response is the Ohio. A new river.

He addresses neither the loaded setting (Nicodemus’s coming by night) nor Nicodemus’s words (“We know you are a teacher come from God”) nor the tension the setting and words create.

“By night” / “we” is a minor chord that instead of resolving becomes the playground for Jesus’ notes on birth. “You must be born again” only adds to the ”by night” / “we” tension.

“You must be born again” may not be a koan plastered over with Protestant doctrine, after all. Maybe the junction of “by night” and “we” at “born again” is the koan. They say the Ohio starts in Pittsburgh. But how can a river start? It’s the sound of one hand clapping.

Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about birth; he spoke to Nathanael about a fig tree. We don’t pull the fruit of doctrine from Nathanael’s tree. Should we take doctrine home from Nicodemus’s delivery room?

Maybe it’s John’s tenuous hold on narrative that lets us pick doctrine from it like a fruit tree. The setting is the husk or the root and branch, easily discarded.

“You must be born again” coming amid the tension of “by night” and “we” feels like Jacob’s wrestling with the man at night amid the tension of (at the junction of) Laban and Esau. It feels also like “neither,” the reset button the Lord’s captain pushes in the overwrought Joshua at the junction of “us” and “them”:

When Joshua was near Jericho he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua approached him and asked, ‘Are you for us or for our enemies?’

The man replied, ‘Neither! I am here as captain of the army of the Lord.’

Joshua prostrated himself in homage, and said, ‘What have you to say to your servant, my lord?’

The captain of the Lord’s army answered, ‘Remove your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy’; and Joshua did so. (Joshua 5:13-15, REB)

Astro Boy.

Sun, 04 Mar 2012 02:20:12 -0500

Astro Boy.

themaxdavis: untitled by xenerr on Flickr. Testing the reblog...

Sat, 03 Mar 2012 06:42:42 -0500

themaxdavis:

untitled by xenerr on Flickr.

Testing the reblog here. But it is a fine photo.

This is a front operation

Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:19:00 -0500

for my Twitter site, which in turn is a foreign tax shelter for my web site.

So that’s about it. Except for the Open Micro tumblelog that brought me here.