In all things, balance is admirable, even desirable.
That’s a hard thing to accept, because so often we’re so wed to our
own causes, our own positions, and our own prospective, to realize that
the middle ground is probably the best place. If two people are arguing,
then, the best resolution is the solution that falls squarely between
them.
This isn’t to say that when arguing people shouldn’t stick to their
guns. Peoples perspective and positions, causes and desires make them
individuals, and allow the discourse to function at the peak of its
(admittedly) limited ability. But, there’s no avoiding the discourse.
But people shouldn’t give up their sides of the argument, or dive to
the center (a political point in reference to the “two” party system),
that creates a completely and largely irrelevant kind of discourse.
Hey, arguing isn’t necessarily bad; having differences of opinion is
healthy. And the last time I checked, that was still legal in this
country. Although lately, I’ve been wondering.
-- (That’ll make sense to people who see As American As Apple Pie.)
Having beaten that to death several times, allow me to offer the
actually interesting part of this post.
I’ve been hearing about the 9/11 commissions, for months. She’ll
testify. She won’t testify. She’ll just ‘talk’ to them. They
testified together. He testified and then He testified and they both
said the same thing.
Which of course lead me to ask: I wonder what this means? I wonder how
this will affect the election? Does it even matter? What are we learning
from this discourse? And on, and on, and on. While I’m not fond of
participating in the discourse of American Politics, or even fond of
commenting on it, I do take some pleasure in listening to NPR regularly,
and just listening to what’s said, and how it’s said. I have no desire
of being a pundit, but within the confines of my car, it’s a fun mental
exercise.
For the past two days I’ve been hearing ‘live’ testimony to the 9/11
commission. It’s really dry stuff. Even for NPR. And I could have been
analyzing what was being said, how they were saying it, their ulterior
motives, and all of that. And I might have been able to confirm
something I already knew, or even gotten something new.
But I didn’t do that. I just listened to what they said. And there was
a kind of beauty to it. Not in the normal, Monet flowers, or
Michelangelo’s David sort of way, but in a tragic thunder and windstorm
blowing over the barn sort of beauty.
And then I realized that I was just kind of tired, and that I was really
listening to a guy describing the complexities and differences between
Staircase A, in the North Tower, and Staircase B in the South Tower for
a good ten minuets.
So I realized that if I could find a kind of touching beauty in the
description of a staircase, that perhaps, I could find beauty in other
things too. If the last two years have taught me anything, it’s that my
artistic goal, if I have one, is to communicate that simple beauty.
Must enjoy fruitful arguments, and life’s simpler pleasures.
--From Apple Pie
Having realized this directive, I have to say that it’s hard to find
those essential moments that have beauty, because I know that they’re
everywhere, but if you go overboard and take pleasure in the rhythm and
organization of a touch-typist’s skill, or knitter’s craft. I mean
it’s there, but its easy to go overboard and get too touchy feely.
On the other hand…
To be Continued…