Wednesday, December 16, 2009

The Tale of Tyger Woods

I've never really paid much attention to poetry (who does), but I've always had a strange affinity for William Blake. As an eccentric Romantic, his work is vivid with mythological imagery that speaks to mankind's unique psychological conflicts. In particular, his "Songs of Innocence" and "Songs of Experience" are two volumes of allegorical poetry that represent the opposing notions of the ideal and the real world. Some poems (like "The Lamb") in Innocence have antithetical poems (like "The Tyger") in Experience.

I suppose this appeals to me because, like Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jeykll and Mr. Hyde, the work explores the duality of man and our internal struggle with good and evil. For our purposes here, I find these inquiries exceptionally relevant as they relate to the dichotomy between public and private personas (whether mediated by a television screen, the lens of camera, or your skin). The tale of Tiger Woods is a sadly perfect example of this: the epic journey from his immaculate conception to an inevitable fall from grace. James Suroweicki's latest New Yorker article is a good encapsulation of his peculiar case. Like Blake's innocent Lamb, Woods has been revealed a depraved (and quite human) Tyger. - Bye, bye Accenture.


Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Anatomy of Obama's Defining Moment



In case you missed it over the weekend:
NY Times piece on Obama's decision-making process.

And an excellent PBS Frontline documentary on the AfPak realities including poignant coverage of the US Marines and their experience in Helmand Province:


Wednesday, December 2, 2009

The Gospel According to Colbert

I take comfort in knowing that 3 out of the TOP 5 books on the New York Times bestseller list include Sarah Palin (#1), Glenn Beck (#4), Mike Huckabee (#5). Damn liberal media....

And, just for kicks, here's a pretty funny Onion News clip with a cameo from the messiah himself:



Zombie Reagan Raised From Grave To Lead GOP

Monday, November 30, 2009

Afghanistan: A "Defining Moment"


Over the last few days I've been reading a paperback from the Harvard Business Review entitled On Leadership. The book is just one publication in a long series "designed to bring today's managers and professionals the fundamental information they need to stay competitive in a fast-moving world"- according to the inside flap anyway. As someone relatively detached from the formal world of business and management, I've found most of the book's entries (written by various "esteemed" authors) pleasantly succinct and insightful. Most pieces are eminently digestible and quite relevant to the world at-large. In my reading, one in particular jumped out at me: "The Discipline of Building Character."

I usually skip over any literature that prominently features the word "discipline" or "character", but upon reading the ever-handy "executive summary", I found myself intrigued by the author's conception of a "defining moment." Written by a renowned Business Ethics professor at HBS, the article makes a fundamental distinction between an "ethical decision" and a "defining moment". In the former case, the decision typically involves choosing between two options, one we know to be right and the other to be wrong (in an ethical sense). The later, more interestingly, involves making critical decisions where there is no "right" answer, but rather a number of difficult alternatives with varying and often imperceptible degrees of "rightness". In such cases, the author explains: "no matter which option we choose, we feel like we've come up short." The author's argument is that these so-called defining moments, taken cumulatively over one's life, form the basis of an individual's character.

I like this assertion. Over the course of all our lives, the crucible of character building is more often than not a catalogue of painstaking, introspective decisions. These moments challenge and reveal our core values, our integrity, and our identity. Fundamentally, they are a critical test of authenticity. Who am I? No facade, no bullshit. I think it's fair to say that Afghanistan presents Obama with such a moment writ large. I've followed the so-called AfPak policy making process very closely, and I still struggle haplessly with the search for a profoundly superior course of action. Of course, I'm not privy to the entire US national security apparatus, but I think most candid observers will acknowledge that our options are "not good", "bad", and "worse". I dismiss the knee-jerk capitulation of many politicians to McCrystal's troop request. It wreaks of typical party politics and unvirtuous expediency. In the end, this may be the "best" course of action, but the gravity of this decision demands intense, conscientious deliberation attended by all relevant parties. My hope is that this is what has occurred over the past few weeks.

The unfortunate reality is that we've painted ourselves in a corner in Afghanistan. Like the proverbial red-headed step child, we've ignored it, under-fed it, and starved it of any discipline. Our policy has been adrift for years without any clear sense of military vision or attainable objective. Is it really surprising that the situation has deteriorated drastically? The constellation of serviceable policy options that once existed has now shrunk to a handful of pathetically dour alternatives. I have absolutely no envy for the President's position, but a fine respect for his character. Solemnly, he will do what he thinks is right.

On a final note, it is my sense that the AfPak problem is virtually unmanageable as far as the US is concerned. However, when you are dealing with nuclear weapons (as we are in Pakistan), the risk of simple withdrawal is too high given the current level of instability. The question is, then, can we leave when things are "stable" (whenever this is), or will our leaving cause renewed instability? Are we in for a semi-permanent occupation? And if the long-term goal of this occupation is some sort of stability provided by pseudo-democratic governance and economic development (which is the real problem, along with education/literacy), can this be achieved with our presence. Maybe, but not at the barrel of a gun. Any sustainable solution will involve extraordinary cultural and economic changes that will take generations to occur and will require the involvement of a dedicated multinational coalition. Are we ready, as a global community, to commit trillions more dollars and hundreds more lives? Or will we lose our collective interest (again) once the issue has escaped the media spotlight?

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

The Gospel According to Al

The prescient insights of UHF and the Great Monseigneur of Mock, "Weird" Al Yankovic:







Saturday, November 21, 2009

Paving Over Stalin's Grass

For those of us in the West, it was simply the Berlin Wall; for those to whom it mattered most, it was Antifaschistischer Schutzwall. To understand this distinction is to begin an authentic inquiry into the extraordinary and often subtle implications of 1989. It's hard to imagine that just over twenty years ago, this iconic, and seemingly indelible monument to the Cold War met its end at the hands of those it confined- both physically and psychologically. While recent media coverage has immortalized the event with all the tinsel of nostalgia and ceremony, deep and complex neuroses still cripple many residents of the "emancipated" East. Unfortunately, the explosive demise of East Germany and its festering psychological fallout cannot be sufficiently relayed by the spectacle of broadcast. A genuine pursuit of historical significance requires empathy. And real empathy is not virtual.

A faithful commemoration of “the fall” would entail nothing less than inhabiting the fragile lives of those who dwelt in its menacing shadow for so long. Any attempt to convey this plight in either words or images inevitably falls short. Our strenuous empathy requires the solemn physicality of place. In other words, you have to be there. However, sadly for Berlin, this monument of struggle is now almost totally gone. The notorious wall that interned a generation is quickly vanishing for good. While some may greet this summary extinction with joy or, worse, apathy, I think the complete lack of organized preservation is both harmful and wrong, and tragically represents a much larger social trend.

As its agitprop name suggests, the Antifaschistischer Schutzwall was foisted on the East German public as a prudent solution to keep the “fascist” West at bay lest the “capitalist cannibals” beset the happy collective. In reality, of course, the wall or “death strip” as it was known locally, was a penal rampart with unparalleled, methodical lethality. Stock media images of the relatively innocuous concrete slabs do not approach an accurate portrayal of the inhumanity. More than a barrier, the strip was a complex system of watchtowers, staggered fencing, anti-vehicle trenches, bunkers, and other cruel obstacles designed to kill or disable those daring to trespass (“Stalin’s grass” was the local nickname for the nail-spiked stretch of corridor intended to impale and trap victims’ feet). The soundtrack was equally unforgiving: the incessant, barking rasp of border dogs, the ghoulish crack of sniper fire, and the grinding wail of military vehicles. Taken together, the wall’s imposition on the human soul was immeasurable.

It begs the question: why would anyone want to preserve any vestige of such obscenity? Because it’s history? Yes- but most importantly because it’s ugly and you could never replicate its aura of depravity. No documentary, no blog, no research paper could ever record or evoke the stark drama of place. If we lose our tangible connection to the past, we forfeit a vital piece of our collective identity, and we resign ourselves to a fate where our only relationship with history is through media-sponsored simulation. We enter a frenzied hyperreality that is devoid of authenticity or originality; where the priceless topography of meaning is constantly razed and repurposed at the careless whim of society; where representation totally supplants reality. We become aliens in our own land, the characteristics of which are unrecognizable and always fleeting. We become passengers of a rudderless vessel at the mercy of a mercurial sea. Unanchored to the past in any meaningful way, we drown in the present. Defeated and demoralized we passively submit to the will of the Spectacle. In a very real sense, we ARE all Berliners.


I recognize the irony, but here is a....

...poignant documentary on the Fall:



...and a BRILLIANT fictional film I HIGHLY suggest renting:



SHIG