The Second Coming: insight as fact and poetry
[ by Charles Cameron — witnessing the second and third order effects of the blood-dimmed tide, almost a century later ]
.
Something which identifies itself as “Fact” apparently says:
The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
— Fact (@Fact) December 13, 2014
I submit that “Poetry” said it better:
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
— W. B. Yeats (@YeatsDaily) October 8, 2014
**
Let’s give Yeats’ comment a little of its context:
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.Surely some revelation is at hand;
The whole poem, The Second Coming, is a notoriously difficult one, and almost demands that one read the poet’s A Vision (perhaps both the 1925 first and 1937 second versions) — and yet the eight opening lines — such insight, such power:
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
**
Where does one turn for hope in such a world as Yeats, writing in 1919, just short of a century ago, both saw and foresaw?
What if the best regain conviction?
December 13th, 2014 at 8:32 pm
Is it bad enough yet?
.
There are a bunch of demonstrations in progress around the United States, have been for the past couple of weeks. I’m not sure this amounts to conviction. Although the article I’ve linked indicates that some changes have been made, we have a long way to go, and demonstrations will not be enough. Political organizing is necessary, and I don’t see that yet.
December 14th, 2014 at 2:54 am
Hi Cheryl:
.
I’m by no means convinced we yet have the “form” required for either national or international “demotic” deliberation, or for bringing the concensus of such a national or international deliberation into reality.
.
Specifically, I have seen very few demonstrations that present a positive image, and suspect that “protest” may not be the best banner under which to present one’s hopes for, and insights into, change.
.
Beyond that, my own efforts presently go into bridge-building rarher than confrontation. A bit of a taoist, I.
December 14th, 2014 at 2:43 pm
Hi Charles –
.
Ah, well, a form for deliberation. I doubt we ever will. But we’ve done reasonably well with bits and pieces, some closer to some ideals than others.
.
I find it positive that people are recognizing that something is wrong. We have had thirty years of propaganda that people are isolated individuals and must act as such. The fact that they are coming together at all is positive.
.
I’d prefer to see change “to” rather than change “from”, too. The latter is what we’ve had for the past thirty years, though, breaking up the structures we’ve had for deliberation and working together. It will take a while for people to see “new” (old) frames and to define objectives.
December 14th, 2014 at 6:28 pm
“What if the best regain conviction?” Mmm. How do you define “the best”?
December 14th, 2014 at 7:34 pm
Hi Marshall:
.
Hm. I haven’t given much thought to a definition, my (parallel?) question would be “how do you select ‘the best’?” — to which I don’t have an answer in any case.
.
It’s been a while, but I think John Fowles had a non-fiction book called _The Aristoi_ which at least discussed the matter. And one could always ask Yeats!
December 15th, 2014 at 3:43 pm
Alas, Yeats stopped answering my postcards and letters some time ago. Myself, I am not persuaded that any group that lacks passionate intensity could qualify as “the best”. But what would I know?
December 15th, 2014 at 7:09 pm
I was wondering whether some combination of “dispassionate intensity” and “compassiomnate intensity” along with “passionate intensity” might be what’s needed.
.
I don’t think Yeats was saying the Nobel Laureate level of good people — think, perhaps, MLK or Trevor Huddleston, Muhammad Yunus, the Dalai Lama, etc — “lack all conviction” but that many people of general goodwill are apathetic by comparison, while the bigoted, almost by definition, are far more opportunistic in pursuit of their goals.
.
Does that make any sense? I don’t think he’s trying for logical precision, but for a powerful and revealing gesture…
December 16th, 2014 at 3:17 pm
Ah, Charles: I come from a long line of quibblers. I hope I do not exasperate you.
.
I think your last comment moves in the right direction.
.
A second question that occurred to me, moments after “How do you define ‘the best’?”, was this: “How do you define ‘conviction’?”
.
English people in the 16th and 17th centuries (the Puritan era) quite commonly used the word “conviction” to describe one person’s proving that another person was in error, particularly moral error. The 17th century Quakers, who (as you know) had a huge impact on my own thinking, were very impressed by that passage in John, in the account of the Last Supper, where Jesus said (in the King James translation) that when the Holy Spirit comes, “he will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment…;” they read that verse in the light of that Puritan way of speaking.
.
This Puritan way of speaking led in turn to a more modern usage of the word: English speakers came to use the word *conviction* to describe a moral stand that a person was driven to take by evidence that cornered and overwhelmed him.
.
And this in turn suggests, I think, that conviction may be what *makes* a person one of “the best”, rather than simply being a trait that “the best” can be “best” without. If I am in possession of evidence that the U.S. government is resorting to torture, or other sorts of unjustifiable violence without telling the American people, and I ruin my career, and wind up in prison or in Russia, for blowing the whistle, because the evidence (and the Holy Spirit) have driven me to the point where I feel I can do no less, people start regarding me as one of “the best”. Thus John Kiriakou, Chelsea (née Bradley) Manning, and Edward Snowden. But was I truly among “the best” *before* I blew the whistle, when I was simply a government employee implementing the torture or the violence? Was Paul one of “the best” while he was persecuting Christians?
.
I do not know whether Yeats was conscious of this usage of “conviction”, and its resonance in English thinking, at the time he wrote his poem. But if he was, it renders his line about “the best”, powerfully ironic. In that case, his poem is using “the best” in a classist sense, and assuming that its readers may be too class-bound to catch what is implied.
December 17th, 2014 at 12:55 am
Are the Quibblers like Ranters and Levelers, then, Brother Marshall? Have you a doctrine?
.
I have to say in passing, though I know little enough of any of the three cases, that while I would be very doubtful of considering Snowden among the best, Ali Soufan is someone whom I would be far more likely to view in that way.
.
Could you say something about the connection between “convince” and “convict” perhaps?
December 19th, 2014 at 4:38 pm
Merely that they come from the same Latin root (*convincere*: (1) to prove mistaken, refute; (2) to prove conclusively, demonstrate), and that they were frequently used as synonyms or near-synonyms at least through the late 17th century. Both words are used, along with “reprove” and “rebuke”, to translate the Greek ?????? in the Authorised (King James) Version — e.g. “convicted by conscience” in John 8:9, “reprove (convict) the world of sin” in John 16:8 (fn); “convinced of the law as transgressors” in James 2:9; “he is convinced of all, he is judged of all” in I Corinthians 14:24.
December 19th, 2014 at 4:40 pm
I did not type “??????” in my previous comment; I typed the Greek, but your blog software refuses to reproduce it. The Greek verb may be transliterated as “elegchô” or “elengkhô”.
December 19th, 2014 at 5:51 pm
Understood, and I am sorry, Marshall.
.
I should point out, however, that our software is the equal of Shakespeare — at least as described by Ben Jonson — at least in terms of having “less Greek” than one might wish.