All posts by Lars Walker

Freedom and equality, redux

I’ve been thinking about my earlier post on the contradictions between the ideas of “freedom” and “equality.”

Today I came up with a briefer version of what I’ve been trying to say, in epigrammatic form.

Below: Walker’s epigram on freedom and equality in political theory:

A man who loves freedom will wish to free the slaves.

A man who loves equality may wish to free the slaves, or he may wish to enslave the free. Either way will achieve his purpose.

Ethnocentric update

I should have brought a camera on Sunday. Sunday was the annual Norway Day festival in Minnehaha Park. The Viking Age Club & Society does it every year, and aside from some rotation in personnel there isn’t usually much to distinguish one year from another.

But this year we’d added a new young man, so that we had four in all, plus another who’s young enough to play with them. Some of them had attended a reenactors’ event in Moorhead last month, and they’d learned some new Viking games. So in our quiet times, we had young guys playing silly, semi-violent, and sometimes rather crude games in our camp, to the amusement of all. This is exactly what a Viking camp should be like.

Except that we still have a shortage of thralls. Haven’t worked out a way to get forced labor out of the Irish yet. Still, boys make a reasonable substitute when it comes to the heavy set-up and take-down work.

The weather threatened in the morning, but it turned into quite a lovely summer day. I had a good time, but only sold three books. Lost all my fights except for the last one, against a young spearman who’d killed me a couple times previously. Before Samuel Colt, the spear made all men equal.

There is no analogy for Aunt Ordella

A little personal news tonight, because I know how you worry. Today, in the course of my application to graduate school, I went to Bethel University in St. Paul and took the Miller Analogies Test. The MAT is a multiple choice test in which you fill in the missing element from an analogy – as in, “Bureaucrat is to Integrity as Jack the Ripper is to ________.” (Correct answer: Feminism) It’s a deceptively hard test. I hope all the other test takers felt as confusticated as I did, because if they didn’t I’m a whole lot dumber than I think I am.
How did I do? I don’t know. I was supposed to go away with a preliminary score, but the laptop they gave me to use had some kind of power issue, and shut itself down in the course of the test – twice. The second time we couldn’t access the test again. I was very nearly done at that point; in fact I’d finished the test itself and was just reviewing my answers. But I don’t know – and neither does the proctor – whether my score actually registered at the other end or not. If it didn’t, I’ll have all the weary work to do again, one hopes at no further cost.
Last Saturday I drove down to Kenyon, my home town, for the funeral of my great-aunt Ordella, who passed away at the age of 103. She was the last surviving child of my great-grandfather, the only remaining pillar of her generation. I think I’m safe in saying that Aunt Ordella was a character. It’s not uncommon for people to lose their inhibitions as they age, but I don’t think Ordella ever had any inhibitions (I’m speaking of social interaction; I know of no sexual scandal in her life). Apparently all the chutzpah in the Walker family got funneled into her. I know nobody in my branch got any of it.
I don’t know what we’ll do without her. It was a beautiful day for a grave-side service in any case.
I wandered the town cemetery for a few minutes. It’s a fairly old cemetery over on the shady east end, where they buried the people with English names who settled back before the Norwegians flooded in. I looked in particular for those bronze “Grand Army of the Republic” stars, indicating Union Army veterans. Found one fellow who served in the First Minnesota “H.A.,” which a little research informs me means Heavy Artillery.
This weekend: Whiz-Bang Days in Robbinsdale! And I’ll be at Norway Day in Minnehaha Park, Minneapolis, on Sunday.

Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card

Note: I used Grammarly to grammar check this post, because they promised me remuneration, and like any good novelist I am for sale. (lw)

People have been telling me I needed to read Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game for years, but I resisted. Science Fiction generally doesn’t interest me a lot, and to be honest Card’s LDS faith put me off. But now the book is coming out as a film, and gay activists want everybody to boycott it because Card’s a pro-family Mormon. So suddenly he’s an ally, and I’m almost obligated to see the film. And if I’m going to do that I might as well read the book. Which I did.

I’m glad I did. It’s very strange, very intense, and heartbreaking.

Andrew (Ender) Wiggin is the result of genetic experimentation in a future where reproduction is regulated by law. His brother and sister were part of the same experiment, and they’re all brilliant, but the brother is a sociopath and the sister too empathetic for the purposes of the program.

The purpose is to create a super-general, a military genius who can lead the forces of Earth against the insectoid “Buggers,” who attacked and nearly destroyed us a generation previously. Knowing we can’t survive another such attack, the world government has created a space station Combat School and filled it with hotshot young students, all of them geniuses. But it’s actually all about Ender. The whole thing exists to hone little Ender (he’s only six when he’s recruited) into a master strategist and tactician, without mercy or hesitancy.

Ender’s compassionate side – which is part of what the government wants from him – agonizes over the choices he has to make, and the things he must do, not only to win the war games but to survive in an environment where several other kids, most of them older than he, envy him enough to kill him. His handlers are ashamed of what they put him through, but they do it anyway, in order to forge their perfect human weapon.

Some have complained that the kids in this book don’t talk like kids, and they’re right. I had to keep reminding myself that these were children and pre-teens. But Card himself responds that we’re talking about geniuses here. There’s nothing normal about the situation. And realism isn’t exactly the point.

I don’t think I’d have guessed a Mormon wrote this book if I hadn’t known beforehand, though there are a couple clues. I was surprised by a kum-bah-ya element in the final resolution. I don’t know enough about LDS theology to know whether they believe (as this story seems to suggest) that there’s no such thing as evil. Or (more likely) I’m reading it wrong.

Intense, compelling. Recommended.

The Pickwick Papers, by Charles Dickens

Cheap and free e-books from sources like the Gutenberg Project are increasingly becoming the public libraries of our time. The ability to acquire them for our electronic readers at no charge has (I suspect; I haven’t done a survey) caused an uptick in readership for classic books. And so it is that I finally came to read Charles Dickens’ The Pickwick Papers.

In 1836, the first installment of The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club appeared. It began as an example of a kind of publication which was very popular at the time, and for which I can’t find a technical name. Such books were published in booklet form chapter by chapter, and were a little like comic books. An artist would produce a series of humorous engravings, and a writer would be hired to pen a brief comic description of that action. The idea for The Pickwick Papers was that a group of Londoners would take trips out into the countryside to participate in sporting activities like hunting, fishing, and ice skating, getting shot at, hooked, and dunked for their pains. The artist retained for the project was a prominent illustrator named Robert Seymour, and the writer they hired was a young up-and-comer named Charles Dickens.

Dickens had entirely different ideas for the project than what Seymour had counted on. Dickens wanted fewer pictures and more text, and he wanted the pictures to follow the text instead of the other way around. Seymour was very unhappy with this plan, and expressed his views through the eloquent means of committing suicide with a shotgun. But publishing is publishing, and another artist was secured, and then another when he didn’t work out. This third artist was Hablot Knight Browne (better known as “Phiz”), who would forever after be the artist most associated with Dickens’ work. As the episodes in the series appeared, it became more and more an illustrated novel, and a bestseller, and Charles Dickens became an international celebrity.

The evolution of the project is very apparent as the reader proceeds. The first chapters are “funny” in a dated sort of way, but the reader (or at least this one) finds himself wondering whether this is all there is to be to it. Dickens clearly felt the same way, and as the story goes on the comedy of character comes to replace the comedy of slapstick. Gradually we see the development of the classic Dickens story, in which the emphasis is on exaggerated characters with funny names, and social criticism.

When Mr. Pickwick comes to hire Sam Weller, a Cockney bootblack he meets at an inn, as his personal valet, the story finds its footing. Pickwick and Sam are very different characters from Bertie Wooster and Jeeves, but I think we could call them their ancestors, in terms of the nature of their master-servant relationship. Though Pickwick is no idiot like Bertie, his areas of innocence concerning the world make it necessary for Sam, who genuinely loves him, to act as a sort of rough-hewn nursemaid and counselor.

The great crisis of the story is the prosecution of Mr. Pickwick for breach of promise, due to a misunderstanding. In a few harrowing chapters, Dickens gets the opportunity to describe the hellish world of the English debtor’s prison of that time, a world he himself knew too well from his childhood.

In Call Each River Jordan, one of the novels in Owen Parry’s (Ralph Peters’) Abel Jones Civil War mystery series, Abel meets an English valet who praises The Pickwick Papers to the skies. It is the only novel in the world, as far as he is concerned. He reads it constantly, over and over again, and no other novel. Abel, a strict Methodist, rejects such worldly amusements. And it’s just as well, because Methodists don’t come off very well in Pickwick. The Methodists described here are pure hypocrites, drinking heavily while preaching abstention, and leading flocks of silly women astray. In a particular section of the book, the chief Methodist “shepherd” berates Sam’s father in an offensively self-righteous way, simultaneous with an act of genuine Christian grace to an old enemy on Mr. Pickwick’s part. All of this is entirely in line with Dickens’ known opinions on religion, but I think it’s a little hard on Methodists.

Still, a book worth reading, for the reader who can work through an older style of writing (and of humor).

Edward Adrift, by Craig Lancaster

I’m going to take a chance here and review a book that will not be acceptable to a fair number of you. I appreciate that, and I understand. My recommendation is conditional.

To get the objections out of the way, I’ll say that Edward Adrift by Craig Lancaster contains a lot of profanity. This is because the main character is a high functioning man with Asperger’s Syndrome. He uses foul language because he repeats what he hears, and doesn’t really understand why some words are OK and some aren’t. A major character in the story tries to get him to stop, and he doesn’t resent it.

Also the approach to sex was uncomfortable for me. Not because there’s explicit sex, but because a scene that involves only a kiss and some petting is portrayed so intimately that I (personally) found it hard to read. But that may be because I score fairly high on the Asperger’s scale myself (though I don’t qualify for the diagnosis), and I identified more than most people would. The attitudes toward sex generally, in this book, are very contemporary and have little if anything to do with biblical morality.

OK, having warned you of these things I’ll go on to say that I found Edward Adrift engrossing and moving.

2011 has not been a good year for Edward Stanton. First of all, his best friends, a family across the street, moved away from his neighborhood in Billings, Montana to Butte. Then the counselor who’d helped him better relate to the world retired and turned him over to another doctor, whom he doesn’t yet trust. Then he was fired from his custodial job at the newspaper. One of the Dragnet videotapes he always watched at 10:00 every night broke, so of course he had to throw the whole set out. Getting diagnosed with diabetes was almost good news for him, because it gave him a reason to start keeping a new list. He loves lists.

But when he gets a call from Donna, one of the neighbors who moved away, that her son Kyle, his best buddy, is becoming uncontrollable and failing at school, Edward makes the (for him) heroic choice to drive his car to Butte and see if he can help. This movement outside his comfort zone sets him up for an adventure in which he’ll do things he’d never imagined.

I thought some elements of this story, especially its resolution, were a little beyond credibility. But I nevertheless read it with fascination and was moved by it.

Just be warned about the language and stuff.

A disquisition on Syn


Through the miracle of YouTube, I have now watched all of the three film adaptations of Russell Thorndike’s Doctor Syn novels, while through the magic of Kindle I’ve read all the novels except for The Courageous Exploits of Doctor Syn, which isn’t yet available in a digital edition. What follows is a guide, from one viewer/reader to another, to this interesting, sometimes exciting, sometimes aggravating adventure series about a vicar in a small town on the Kentish coast who is secretly a former pirate captain, and who runs an efficient – often ruthless – smuggling operation, riding by night in the costume of a ghostly scarecrow.
The author, Russell Thorndike, was an accomplished actor (Dame Sybil Thorndike was his sister, and you can still see him in small parts in several of Laurence Olivier’s Shakespearean movies) but his great love was writing. He authored a one-off novel about smugglers called Doctor Syn: A Smuggler Tale of the Romney Marsh in 1915, and was surprised to find its central character become far more popular than he’d ever anticipated.
The first film version of any of the books was a 1937 English production starring the actor George Arliss in his final role. This one was called Doctor Syn and was based on Thorndike’s novel of the same name. Arliss was about 70 when he played this role, which is too old for the part, and he functions more as a mastermind than an adventurer here. Continue reading A disquisition on Syn →

A story in the perspective of time

Today I was reminded of an incident back when I was attending a Lutheran college in the Midwest (go ahead and guess which one; I went to three). I was in an English Literature class. The teacher was a very pleasant woman. She was openly liberal, and liked to season her lectures with provocative ideas to challenge her students’ beliefs, but she wasn’t a hostile person.

I remember her describing a story she’d read that was “controversial.” But it was a very good story (she said) one that raised important questions. I don’t recall the title or the author. I don’t recall whether it was a short story, a novel, or even a play.

She said the dominant character in this story was a remarkably difficult woman. Other characters tried various methods for coexisting with her, and she frustrated every one of them. “In the end,” my instructor said (and I’m quoting her exact words here) “there was nothing you could do about this woman except rape her.”

I sat there listening to this, and I immediately rejected it. I felt very provincial and callow in doing so, of course, because I knew I lacked my instructor’s sophistication. But I couldn’t think of any circumstance in which rape would be appropriate. I’d just have to accept, as I had many times before, that I was an unsophisticated hick from the farm.

Years have passed, more than 40 of them, and if that instructor is still alive, I suspect she’s changed her opinion of that story. Sophisticated people no longer consider rape an edgy, taboo subject to be explored. Rape is evil, the foul fruit of male social domination.

My point is that I didn’t have to wait for fashionable opinions to change in order to see rape as categorically wrong. My liberal instructor did.

I was following the North Star. She was listening to voices in the dark.

Freedom and equality: enemies



Photo credit: Serguey

Just a little more about the American system, from a certified non-expert.

There are many expressions that we hear all our lives, beginning in our childhood (this is very noticeable in the church), expressions which we tend to skate over without considering their specific meanings.

“Freedom” and “equality” are two of those. I suspect a lot of Americans think they mean the same thing. And they most emphatically do not.

Here’s the thing our Founders understood, which neither the later French revolutionaries or most moderns comprehend. Freedom and equality are in fact mortal enemies.

If you have total freedom, equality is impossible, because some people will be more successful at what they do, and at life itself, than others. The weaker and the less intelligent may even be crushed under the feet of the stronger and the more clever.

If you want total equality, you’re going to have to clamp down on everybody, and ruthlessly cut off every head that pokes above the level of the average.

The American answer to that problem was to set up a system meant to achieve a balance. “Equality of opportunity” means everybody gets as equal a chance in the game as possible. But equality was never enshrined as an American motto, as it was for the French – “Liberty, equality, fraternity.” For Americans it was life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

As for the losers in life’s game, their care was left to the family and the church. And they were encouraged to try again. America’s bankruptcy system was designed to permit people to start over, something European systems discouraged.

When people used to talk about the American way, that’s what they meant.

Of civil society

As our great national holiday approaches, I’m about to (fair warning) write about theoretical politics. I do so with a great deal of shame, because I should have understood this before. My thoughts were sparked by an article (to which I was directed by Ori Pomerantz) at First Thoughts, “Crushing Civil Society,” by Peter Leithart, an article which isn’t even about America but about eastern Europe under communism. Still it sparked a gap in the gap-rich environment of my brain, and helped me crystallize some pre-existing thoughts. In a way I should have done long ago.

The realization I came to while reading, although it involved no fresh ideas, provided me a new, systematic way to think about government. We – or at least I – tend to use the terms “civil society” and “government” almost interchangeably. But in fact they are very distinct things.

Civil society means the associations people naturally form, of their own volition. A church (at least in America) is a civil institution, because it wasn’t ordained by the government, but by a private group. Marriage is a civil matter – indeed, the union of man and woman as the kernel of the family forms the essential center of the civil order, which is why so many of us consider government redefinition of the institution a grave danger. Through most of history, people have gotten their “social welfare” from civil society – from their families and their churches (I’m speaking of the West. Other institutions dominated elsewhere in the world, though the family is pretty much universal).

But in order to get along with others in a civil society, that society must establish what we call “laws.” Our English word “law” (as I’ve mentioned here before) comes from an Old Norse word – “lagu” – which originally meant “layers.” It conveyed the idea of something that lies evenly on everyone – the rules by which we agree to work when we’re cooperating, whether on a Viking raid or in running our petty kingdom. Continue reading Of civil society →