Posted tagged ‘George Washington’

Where’s the Pie? (Thinking of George on an Empty Stomach)

February 21, 2012

You Know Who and You Know What

When I was little, you could not get past George Washington’s birthday without at least a sliver of cherry pie.  The crust might not be the flakiest, but the cherries were red, sweet and glutinous enough to get you through the greyest mid-week February.  (We did not herd holidays to the nearest Monday back then.)

The sales ads all had little hatchets on them, not only in honor of chopped prices, but of HONESTLY chopped trees.   (“I cannot tell a lie,” Crazy Eddy burbled maniacally.  Yes, we knew he could probably be undersold, but it was still a good schtick.)

Fast forward to 2012.  We have plenty of sales, plenty of chopped trees, lots of talk about honesty (and lots of flakiness too.) But what about the pie?

That’s what I want to know, and (since I haven’t had dinner yet), the sooner the better:  what happened to all that pie?!???  

Dear President O: Sorry, But Talk Of Kicking A– Just Sounds L—

June 8, 2010

With All Due Respect, It Just Hurts You

Dear Mr. President,

I don’t blame you for being p—–.  You were down there in the rain.  You were down there before all these talking heads even knew what was going on.  You were down there even before there was a Web cam.

I don’t blame you for being very very frustrated.  People seem to expect that a President, like a king, can cure scrofula with the touch of a hand.  I’m not sure what scrofula is, but you get the point—they seem to think that you have quasi-magical powers, and that any hesitation in the use of this magic is a sign that you just don’t care.

I absolutely believe that you are hopping mad at BP, just as you are hopping mad at NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, CNBC, AP, and practically every single commercial organization out there with a name of three letters or less.  But when your showing pique is actual news, when Brian Williams has to make a televised announcement telling us that your showing anger is what we are about to see (from a clip of an interview with Matt Lauer) then you have just got to accept that the voice of rage does not come readily to you.

Personally, I think that’s fine.   No one ever disparages George Washington for keeping his temper.  Washington himself, in the Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior In Company and Conversation, which he transcribed before the age of 16, set down Rule 45th, “in reproving Shew no Sign of Cholar but do it with all Sweetness and Mildness.” 

I happen to be someone who shows Choler a fair amount.  But, when I’m in a better mood, I generally understand that anger to be a sign of my immaturity—the ManicDDaily part of me.  I get angry because I want the world and people in it to be different than they are.   But the world is what it is; s— happens; people can be jerks; sometimes, my own anger (as warranted as it is!)  just adds to the general jerkiness of it all.   A few curt admonitions definitely have their place;  still, it’s often more useful to focus on concrete steps than to rant at the nature of nature (human, mechanical, or divine.)

The point is that some people angry are cold, clear, analytical.  (Often such people are mainly angry at themselves–for not predicting jerky people, jerky circumstances.)

I don’t know, Mr. President, if your anger takes you into those cold, clear waters  (the kind we’d really like to protect), but I’m pretty sure it’s not the type of anger that rants about “kicking a–.”  The words are dumb words, and they sound especially dumb coming from you.  They don’t flow from your lips correctly; there’s a stutter, a disconnect, that comes across as forced and petulant.

So, let it go.  Be yourself.  Stop worrying about the anger bit; just keep worrying about the doing bit.

George Washington, Sarah Palin, Cherry Pie and Christian with a capital “C”

February 15, 2010

Washington and Cherry Pie

Presidents’ Day.  In my youth, we had Lincoln’s Birthday on February 12 and Washington’s Birthday on February 22.  I don’t remember specific rituals around Lincoln’s Birthday, but Washington’s was celebrated with cherry pie.

And, of course, big sales.

Now, what we mainly have are the sales.

I could not help thinking of Washington today.  Partly because I still had Sarah Palin’s Tea Party speech on my mind, “American Exceptionalism”, and the attempt (apparently among certain members of the Texas Education Board) to characterize the founding fathers as Christian (with the capital “C” and silent “F” of Fundamentalism).

Even when I was little, the one thing we all knew about George Washington was that whole incident with the cherry tree. We had been told that the story was probably not true, but understood that the point was that Washington himself was true; a good man; that even as a child (like us), he could not lie.  (I thought about him as a kind of American Pinocchio.)

Of course, even the true stories about Washington stress the strength and nobility of his character, noticeable in both his age and youth.  I read today, in connection with thinking of Washington’s character, the precepts Washington copied out at sixteen:  Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation, 110 maxims which are believed to have come from a book published in 1664 in London entitled, The Young Man’s Companion, and which, in turn, were derived from rules developed by French Jesuits in 1595.

The Rules are a detailed compendium of how to show respect and consideration to others, both in matters of literal nit-picking as well as “not-picking-upon.”  Although the rules urge a young man to keep the “celestial fire” of conscience alive, they do not seem to teach how to please a Christian God (there are no biblical references), but how to be a good, honorable, admirable person.

The founding fathers, shaped as they were by the Enlightenment, seem to me to have been big on such precepts, guidelines, universal rules.  One thinks of Ben Franklin, who, in his Poor Richard’s Almanac, published literally hundreds of adages, rules to live by.  While some of Franklin’s adages do mention God (as in “God helps those who help themselves”), and many castigate immorality (especially hypocrisy), the focus is more on prescribing a moral life because it is a key to happiness, contentment, self-fulfillment, societal good:  “Sin is not hurtful because it is forbidden but it is forbidden because it’s hurtful. Nor is a Duty beneficial because it is commanded, but it is commanded, because it’s beneficial.”  (Poor Richard’s Almanac, from 1739.)   In other words, a good life is its own reward, and, more importantly, is a reward.

Thomas Jefferson was particularly interested in theology;  he even wrote specifically about Jesus, but again, his interest seems to focus not so much the specific religious meaning of Jesus, but in Jesus as a sublime paradigm of the ethical life.  (Apparently, Jefferson’s book, published in 1820, The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, sets forth Jesus’s ethical pronouncements, while editing out the Virgin birth, the miracle stories, Jesus’s claims to divinity, and the resurrection.)

I really do not know as much about the history of these men as I would like, so forgive me (and comment) if I’m mischaracterizing them.  I’m certainly not trying to make them out as “anti-Christian”, but simply saying that it seems bizarrely reductive, simplistic, and manipulative (i) to argue that the use of the word “God” or “Creator” in our founding political documents aligns the founding fathers with the religious right; (ii) to ignore the historical context of these guys (as heavy readers of both the Bible and Voltaire), and (iii) to treat them as if they were somehow more mainstream versions of Joseph Smith, i.e. specific transmitters of divine will.

Agh!

And yes, it’s possible to be ethical and even christian without the capital “C” or the capital “F”, in the same way that one can honor the American flag without being pro-war.  One can even like cherry pie.

(All rights reserved.)

PS- if you like elephants, as well as watercolors, check out 1 Mississippi by Karin Gustafson on Amazon.