Pope's health troubles continue.  I wonder, watching the stock footage of audiences, if all famous people are essentially vanishing into the same template within the mediated hyperreality.  Is there any qualitative difference in seeing the Pope struggle with mortality, compared to the same case with another famous person or politician?  Or has the television inured us to the ideal dimensions of the event, and there is now no difference between these figures qualitatively, in terms of the idea of who it is that we are seeing a video of.  (News these days comes from the UK newspaper sites and YouTube.)

It seems the idea no longer governs, and the representation, albeit in millions of reproductions, makes us think of everyone as basically the same entity in relation to us. After Joyce's newspaper report "the snow was general over Ireland," we have the ongoing television coverage of  mortality, general over the species.

Presidents can dismiss generals.  The countervailing force is not law, but mistake.  La ley fecit la roi.

Interesting (and correct) polarization against signs of national socialism stateside.  Peculiar, perhaps, in light of the intervention in the European war, given the discourse around that.  Not to mention the stateside political faction that seems to be fomenting the reaction.

Eventually, you've got to ask the fellow with a hammer to stop hitting you in the knee.

 When I arrived, the strays were very docile, much like in the famously laid-back country (don't believe that entirely, by the way) just to the north.  Met a mob of about a dozen on the main street, and they just trotted by.  But with the first warming, things seem to have changed.  Late at night, entire canine wars seem to be going on in the outskirts, noises of considerable extremity. Occasionally mixed with gunfire.  It's my understanding that there's a regular control program in the national capital now, hopefully it will expand.

From what little I've read of the local politics, the American elections seem to have caused some waves. The opposition leader, long the target of foreign sanctions, according to the local press has hired the American president's former campaign manager (likely, retained his consultancy.  apparently lives in the city where I grew up.), and one local news source explained the arrest of the capital's mayor on corruption charges as an attempt by the reigning powers to demonstrate an antipathy to the forces of Soros, who, not incidentally, the manager/consultancy attacked in their initial press release. I suppose Kissinger developed the model, but I'm not sure how I feel about America sending its campaign slogans abroad with these partisan consultancies.  

I actually worked in those foundation offices on Sixth near the park for a few months when temping as an admin and auditioning in midtown.  Interesting place.  Free five-star lunches, but I always went down to street level for a slice or a knish/dog.  Never ate the bread and salt -- not for any political reasons, just simply my way. Other work to be done, and power's an odd thing.

 

The statues in that town were very useful.  A statue of an author near my rooms led me to an English translation of his works that were very instructive about the country.  Peculiar translations of the titles.  Popa, the local argot for pastor, became 'pope.'  An expatriate from Hungary was 'the gendarme' -- and when it became clear that it was an ex-military fellow, I almost called out aloud "guardsman." 

Listening to statues, arguing with books.

Perhaps part of the increasing transatlantic rift is personal.  Listening to foreign leaders talk about the present leadership, it's like they're watching someone play pinball with one foot under the machine.  Old line from Jean-Claude Juncker: "We all know what we should do, and if we did it, we wouldn't get reelected." 

Europe generally has a much more sociological sense of duty among the leadership.  No less bloodthirsty in the corridors of power, no doubt, but when they reach the office, one gets the sense that the work of understanding the right begins.  

In the last city, there was an interesting tribute to Woodrow Wilson across from the research library--the tribute ends by praising him for his work in advancing a "rightful and united Europe" (droit/drept/recht)  Perhaps due to this quirk of the language, the righteousness of the American politician is fundamentally different from the righteousness of a European politician.

To be clear, I should mention at some point that I don't work for any intelligence services, or any similar group.  At least any of the ones on earth.  (Orson gets regular siteps.)  

Just a random fellow wandering the Balkans, drinking coffee, reading philosophy, and going to the theatre. 

Carry on. 

You know, the push to get the expensive rocks and dirt might slightly undercut the theory under which traditional doctrines of neutrality were addressed earlier on in the imbroglio. Just a thought.

 

 I very much prefer the 'bildung' school of philosophy talks, which are meaningful both in their relation to other things and in themselves, but the trend is definitely towards those that only answer to the first requirement.  I remember a talk one evening at a large state university that solely consisted of 'calling out' to the people in the audience who had done work in the field and offering a thought or two on each line of work, and leaving the interaction to the conversations afterward. (I headed out for a solo coffee.) 

When a talk is only meaningful in relation to other things, like a jazz line that requires some knowledge of the original melody to have any meaning other than patterned exertion, it just means that the world of the event is larger than the room.  An obscure point on epistemology in relation to someone else's article, even if it does make a new theory of mind snap into place for the first time, does require a distributed cognition of sorts.  And the myth is that it's all one big cognition, slowly reaching its perfection (and a dangerous objective correlative is emerging in the mechanical world).  In fact, these integrated speakers are simply responding to the events in the near space, without really advancing the cause of any larger project.

Heidegger's definition of a discipline, as opposed to an area (I think), was the creation of a reticulated shared field of reference associated with the world at the point at which it claimed a competency.  A theatre faculty, for example, would be doing meaningful work so long as they all knew what each other meant, and shared the sense of  the relations between the terms that they used, and these terms were associated with objective phenomenae of the art at certain points.  The difficulty, though, is that most faculties make a much broader claim than that, and assert that they are connected to the whole, both in the particular and in the meaning that they create, but for that, you'd need to either have a very good philosophical understanding of the relation of the art form to the world, or a complete lack of a philosophical understanding of the relation of the art form to the world. The result of any discipline is either the transformation in the thing that it is studying (politicians learn history, mice master the maze) or a reliable map of the territory, although labelled in an imaginary language.

To connect the earlier thought, their relation to the melody might be real, but since the one outside the field doesn't hear the music as they do, it just seems like patterned exertion.  (Many lit-crit/junket conferences consist entirely of these trading-eights.) But the point is that these patterns should be reliably associated with objective elements of the studied practice, either mapping it or transforming it.

Science has displaced personal understanding -- yes, the language of a given field, so long as it is mathematical (Kant's criterion) or experiential, is the mensura, but only according to its own logic.  Humans still govern all talk of the totality of things. 

Say someone totters into the agora one day and shouts: "It's all water!  Everything is water."  A short time later, someone thinks to disagree, and suggests that it's all fire.  Now, as the discussion begins, no one is under the illusion that they are going to be able to discover the water or fire in things.  What makes it meaningful is that a human, at the most perceptive condition they could summon, and in the public square, spoke their best truth, and there was some truth in what he said.  When we respond to the idea, we respond to the soul who fashioned the proposition sive necessitatis.

And even the most dry talk, if you follow the cloud of distributed cognition, ends in a sacramental profession along these lines.  If you were to spend your life arguing with the propositions generated and advanced by a computer (without considering them to be derivative of words spoken in the air), you'd rightly be called a computer repairman.  The meaningfulness of the proposition isn't in the the object, but the res.  The human, in relation to the situation, who fashioned a thought.  

So I'm partial to the educative approach (interesting back-and-forth in the TLS letters recently about educare/educere) in which you give at least some sense of the argument from first terms, largely because this tends to put the responsibility on the speaker to say something themselves.  Much as I think the very old practice of judges all writing separate opinions and letting the bar figure out the law of the decision was a much better scheme.  The human voice, and the apodictic.  And it's best if both the voice and the truths are in the same room

Eventually one stops waving one's arms and shouting that the world is unjust, and acts in the world, knowing the world to be unjust.

 R. GLUECK: Is there no other device whereby the
discretion of the district attorney might be disciplined
to some extent?
MR. MEDALIE: There is this: The rule in the
Department of Justice, as I understand it, applicable
throughout the country except in the Southern District of
New York --
MR. HOLTZOFF: And the District of Columbia.
MR. MEDALIE: (Continuing) -- is that no nolle
shall be entered without the approval of the Department of Justice.
Now, the New York district attorney won't put up
with it because he does not see why he, being supposedly
an important member of a great bar, should be subject to
review by some person having a minor status in the
Department of Justice, because that is what it comes to.
For example, in bankruptcy cases, he might decide a certain
ease of concealing assets should be nolle prossed. Then a
person who does Important, but routine work, and does not
have the status of an assistant attorney general, would be
passing on his decisions, which would be perfectly absurd
because, in practice, it is found he does it mechanistically,
that is, he argues about minor points and says there is a
prima facie case. You frequently nolle prosse --

MR. WECHSLER: I never knew that to happen, George,
that anybody in the Department of Justice argued about a
nolle prosse.

MR. MDALIE: Then you mean that that supervision
is nothing?
MR. WECHSLER: Right, George.
MR. MEDALIE: It may be. In any event, the
United States attorneys in this district refuse to submit to
that. My predecessors refused, I did, and I think my
successor did, too, and it works pretty well. I never heard of any scandal as a result.

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/fr_import/CR02-1943-min-Part3.pdf.pdf @1109

 

 

When you go to an institution, go specifically to the useful things at that institution.  Otherwise, you're just trying to become part of the order of things, and that sort of thing happens without any effort on your part. The cathedral is a place created in the order of things that can be used for meditation and prayer, so if you find a big stone building, you might be able to get some work done.  Additionally, it's the place set up (for many interesting reasons) by the present order of things for the transmission of sacred texts, and sacraments.  The order of things itself is therefore what comes to the place.

Otherwise, simply running to the church every morning is like being a dog at the gates.  And a dog at the gates has this advantage over humans: he's not doing it to be a dog at the gates in a certain world.  He knows that there are useful things inside.  Cunning fellow.

The First Circle work continues to be inordinately brain-scrambling.  Have shifted the day so I do what thinking and reading I can beforehand, and afterwards is dinner and taped talks.  

Have already drafted a short-story in my mind, sort of along the lines of the Red-Headed League, and with all the paranoia of late 90s Russian fiction about a secretive agency of some sort or other who hires all the academic outcasts of the moment and proceeds to use some sort of hypnotic writing to get into their minds.  Fiction, of course.  Current tasks are the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful work I could imagine.

Chatter around the successor of Peter is a bit macabre, and given all the internal politics at issue, a bit tone-deaf.   Hopefully, the next time is many years off, but the last time a reigning pope died, I was in St. Pat's, and the MC came out in choir (I think) and announced it from the ambo a rather long time before the media said anything.  I think a second announcement might have dialed it back a bit, but I don't recall it being retracted.  Might be wise to be reticent about such things.  The more worthwhile people seem to have obituary notices in the paper a fortnight after the fact.  In early America, the soul-bell would be rung when news arrived, so that everyone could pray at that moment, but it might be a different matter if few intend to offer an Ave or two.  On the other hand, perhaps the simultaneous thought of millions of minds might be helpful. Hard to tell.

The parties are left with neither an impartial decision by a
panel of experts nor a transparent decision for which a po-
litically accountable officer must take responsibility. And
the public can only wonder “on whom the blame or the pun-
ishment of a pernicious measure, or series of pernicious
measures ought really to fall.” The Federalist No. 70, at
476 (A. Hamilton).

(United States v. Arthrex, Inc.)

(Pincite in: DC District Ct. on DOGE TRO)

Wondering if the current Executive realizes that they need to effectuate the will of all the Congresses, not just the acts of the last year or two.  At least until the present group can undo the appropriate doings.

There is an important distinction between difficulty and peril. In the present peregrination, I've only felt genuine spiritual peril in two places: at a certain moment in a certain predominantly Muslim city, and a certain quarter of a city in German Transylvania.  In neither case was there anything I could explain in the NYT, and there have been genuine difficulties, some rather intense, in other places.  But those were the two instances of peril of which I was conscious.  Conversely, the Muslim city was (and remains) the place of the most spiritual promise, and the other city has been useful to me for the theatre to be seen there. 

One does take risks, but one is careful to always be ready for such moments.  There are such things as souls, and if something exists, a fortiori, it can also not exist.  But I've learned the most from the teachers who were trying to take everything from me (which made the more secular corruption of the state universities a bit easier to bear).  

"Where the danger is, there the saving force grows."

Clearly, running into some productivity difficulties this week.  Part of it is that when one part of your day is the least favorite part, it becomes the most difficult, and your mind tends to center more of the day on it.  

On the bright side, I have shifted the web presence to more of a constant output model, so perhaps opening those valves a bit will help work some worthwhile writing in with the mind-numbing First Circle tasks.

One begins by beginning.

Completely uninformed amateur speculation, but my guess is that any plan which secures the place where they've been keeping their boats for over a century, plus a scenario of political/trade influence with countries near the sea would end things rather quickly. The territory taken seems to match those undeclared aims. Look at 19th c. naval maps of the base in relation to the sea -- it was the great gate.  More than one war in the last few centuries over it, involving many of the same principals (sic).

Separately, a bit worried at this cadre of NYC businessmen doing deals outside of the diplomatic structure.  Once they get a taste for it, publicists might be in for dark times.  The fiction of the nation-state is a rather necessary fiction in a world of nation-states.

#notexpert #wiseacring

Pope with a bit of a cold.  Oddly, thinking structurally, has been just as transformative within the church (so far) as the democratically elected president has tried to be within the government.  Obviously, though, coming from vastly different mindsets, perhaps because of the distinct political form that has to arise within each institution in order to sufficiently empower a maker of change at the top. 

I have two theories about the last election.  First, that people voted for their neighbors boss, rather than voting for their neighbor.  Second, that people tried to compensate for having very little power of their own by making as big a change as they possibly could.  And as always, those thinking ahead of the game wired that button to their own benefit.

 Feast of Fra Angelico.  

There's perhaps some ambiguity to this image.  The incident from the biography is that he's turning away from a lump of valuable rock and indicating the church.  But a naive observer might also think that the austere monastic was fleeing the Masses of gold in the churches behind.  A constant tension.  When passing a church, remember that there's a rather important book inside.  When passing a library, remember that there's quite likely a few books in it that would be more appropriately read in a sacred place.  I remember happening upon the sacred Tibetan shelves in the library in Indiana one afternoon.  Vigilate.

 

You know, the western European disarray is actually probably helpful in winding up the war, as there's less of a monolithic threat, but the mad-genius, never-happen way out of the mess is a redux of the Visegrad group as a defensive alliance (perhaps plus one or two).  It seems mad given the current polarization, but  these are the lighthouses in the shadows of the east, and their polarized alliances, in every case, are severally calculated to hold off the more potent threat in each geographic case.  #notexpert #possiblyquitemad

Day totally annihilated by things going wrong and the usual First Circle work.  I do appreciate all the work that went into raising the sun from the horizon and all that, but just wasn't able to make proper use of it.  Kudos, though, universe.  Quite a mechanism you have there.

 Really, if you think about it, going completely mad is all in the mind.  It's just a mental thing.

Wifi and water restored after some hours of scrambling.  Apparently simply a matter of flipping switches in the owner's area.  Oddly synchronous flowing things.  Or perhaps larger patterns outside the immediate biosphere.  Best not to dwell.

 WiFi and water out at the rental this AM.  One goes on.

Incipit Septuagesima. Circumdederit me undique.. 

(They compassed me on every side, and there was no one that would help me. I looked for the succour of men, and there was none.)

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13721b.htm 

Possibly interesting angle with the quashed quashing in the sovereign district -- unsurprisingly for that office, the two folks put in professional peril were ex-Scotus clerks.  Still wondering why the blue team hasn't set up camp outside the DC Circuit--the LA times had a recent piece on where the challenges were happening, and it seems to be determined by seeking the favorable circuit.  Which I suppose is good for the injunction stage, but might risk some unpersuasive percolating opinions.  Fascinating to watch.  Haven't a clue what's actually going on.

In a novel, when an author introduces a character, they are placing it in a constellation with all of the other characters in view, essentially positing that the sum of those in view compose a complete understanding.  The second dimension of interpretation is the motion of event, which does the same by creating a sequence, rather than a constellation.  So the composition is associating things which are divided, and the progression is dividing things which are associated.  Both working to assert the claim that the synthesis, whether constellation or sequence, creates a complete spirit.

Power in the modern West comes from story and recognition, not status.  It becomes about the ability to tell a certain story about someone.  When someone characterizes someone to you, say, gives them a funny nickname, try to ground that thought in what you know of their status or position.  (Status and position also come from stories, but these stories are grounded in agreements that run much deeper.) If you think that there can be no grounding of any individual within a status or position, and it's all a sort of game that could be played without reference to anything outside of it, then you are like the vast majority of people in the West, and you are likely highly susceptible to these powers of influence.

In Memories of my Life (1908) Galton described him as 'the traveller most gifted with natural advantages for that career' and added that 'he easily held his own under difficulties, won hearts by his sympathy, and could touch any amount of pitch without being himself defiled'...

https://www.oxforddnb.com/display/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-21380 

Consistent browser bug: something is writing a json file and creating enterprise-level permissions for website certificates.  If I were important enough to be concerned about such things, I'd be concerned, but it's entirely possible that it's just an Avira antivirus measure that kicks in at odd times.  Like Luke firing a blaster at the Empire's drones on a remote frozen moon, I just take them out them when they appear.  Drones will be drones.

...drawing on a phrase of his author Hans Magnus Enzensberger – “paperbacks can alter our entire sociology of reading, the intellectual turnover of society” – Unseld decided to begin a new mass-market series. He remained canny enough, even so, not to present it as such, preferring the term “edition suhrkamp”, with the subversive lower-case nouns typical of Enzensberger’s poetry. Launched with Brecht’s Life of Galileo as its first volume, followed by other in-house heroes such as Hesse and Frisch, the series was a roaring success. Even difficult philosophers such as Ernst Bloch or Theodor Adorno sold about 10,000 copies in the first month alone. (To this day, edition suhrkamp has sold more than 40 million copies). Whether people were actually reading Bloch or Adorno is another matter, but they certainly wanted to be seen with them. With his flair for fashions and genius for marketing, Unseld captured – and monetized – the zeitgeist of critique.

 https://www.the-tls.co.uk/lives/biography/hundert-briefe-siegfried-unseld-book-review-ben-hutchinson

 

 Reading the TLS (substituting for the full paper in the interest of finding more interesting things) is a little like the vizier going to the balcony and calling out to the huddled wretches in the courtyard, asking them what was being talked about in the great palaces.  The wretches are are both quite impressed by the distant palaces and honored to have the chance to talk about them, but you do need to see through both the critical wretches attempting to impress you and the agendas of distant palaces to suss out what the remarkable thing underneath might be.

Alternatively, I suppose you could use it to measure the inclinations of the wretches of the moment, or what the distant palaces might be up do, but I'm a bit of an idealist.