Julia Ward Howe- 1870, lest we forget, wrote this in the original Mother's Day proclamation:
Arise, then, women of this day!
Arise, all women who have hearts,
Whether our baptism be of water or of tears!
Say firmly:
"We will not have great questions decided by irrelevant agencies,
Our husbands will not come to us, reeking with carnage,
for caresses and applause.
Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn
All that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy and patience.
We, the women of one country, will be too tender of those of another country
To allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs."
From the bosom of the devastated Earth a voice goes up with our own.
It says: "Disarm! Disarm! The sword of murder is not the balance of justice."
Blood does not wipe out dishonor, nor violence indicate possession.
As men have often forsaken the plough and the anvil at the summons of war,
Let women now leave all that may be left of home for a great and earnest day of counsel.
Let them meet first, as women, to bewail and commemorate the dead.
Let them solemnly take counsel with each other as to the means
Whereby the great human family can live in peace,
Each bearing after his own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar, but of God.
In the name of womanhood and humanity, I earnestly ask
That a general congress of women without limit of nationality
May be appointed and held at someplace deemed most convenient
And at the earliest period consistent with its objects,
To promote the alliance of the different nationalities,
The amicable settlement of international questions,
The great and general interests of peace.
ideas, thoughts, stories, reviews, on filmmaking, story concepts, and human conditioning. Caution: Read at your own risk.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Change for the Sake of Change
Change for the sake of change is a foul concept, or so my
high school English teacher said to me when I would talk about how things need to
change. She didn’t get that I wasn’t
suggesting “change for the sake of change,” as she suggested was my meaning. No.
I was suggesting change for the sake of reason. The most unreasonable thing is
consistency for the sake of consistency, or as I used to say, tradition for the
sake of tradition. But that’s exactly what tradition is. It has no reason. Why
do we follow tradition?
Cowardice. Those who follow tradition only because of
tradition itself, and not for a reason other than that, have no balls. But
worse than that they have no mind, no soul, no thought, no reasoning, and no
purpose. Tradition is not a purpose. In fact tradition is not even a thing. The
word is not a noun. It’s an adjective, even if you say it’s a noun, even if
Websters says it’s a noun.
Can you see a tradition? Can you feel it? Oh you may say,
well it’s abstract, like love or God. Really? Tradition is in the same realm as
abstract concepts? In that case, it’s completely subjective and can only have
meaning is a personal context. So any given tradition, like love or God, has a
completely different meaning in the context it is used and by whom.
You can say the very same things about change. But I don’t
suggest change for the sake of change. I suggest it for reason. Is tradition
suggested for reason? I don’t think so. You could stretch that to say tradition
is for the purpose of pleasing those who honor tradition. But that’s just the
same as saying that tradition is for the sake of tradition, which, for me at
least, has absolutely no merit.
You wouldn’t suggest that change has merit when it for the
sake of those who honor change. That sounds ludicrous. So why doesn’t the same
hold for tradition? Well, it does. Tradition for the sake of tradition is
ludicrous, and if you suggest that tradition can be for some other valid
reason, then it’s no longer tradition. It’s now a suggestion for a purpose of
reason, and a purpose of reason cannot be a tradition, even though it may
happen to be considered so.
Change for reason also cannot be change for the
sake of change, for it is for a reason. Only concepts of reason can have
merit and the reason of tradition cannot be a reason, because tradition has
circulatory meaning and refers back only to itself, rendering it meaningless.
And when it does mean something else, it’s not tradition, it’s now change.
It’s no stretch to substitute the word religion for
tradition in the above. Religion also is meaningless and has circulatory
meaning. The big argument for religion is faith, which is nothing more than to
say the reason for religion is religion itself, for faith and religion are
interchangeable and mean the same thing.
But tradition like religion allows people to feel secure in
knowing how things are. But really that’s a lie. We can never know how things
are. If we did there would be no such thing as change or surprise. If you believe
in tradition you are a fallacy. You are deluded into thinking you know
something. In reality you cannot know what you think you know. Surprise and
change are inevitable and whatever it is you think you know eventually dissolves
in the face of change. So you can only know things temporarily. But even then,
not with any certainty. At any moment something could change unexpectedly.
For example. This could end and you might not have any clue as
to why you bothered to read it. But the reason you read it is because you
believe in change. You read anything and any story to find out what’s next and
that is the act of seeking change. Everything changes constantly. There is no
tradition. It is a myth.
Politics is tradition, is a lie, is meaningless, and in fact
presumes lack of change. Otherwise we don't need politicians to argue for changes. Those in politics play with the word “change” like it’s
a basketball. Politicians are steeped in tradition. They live and die for the
sake of tradition, which amounts to nothing. All they can do is to suggest a
change or two to give the appearance of life. But since they are well paid and
use the opportunity to line their own pockets, it in fact amounts to self-preservation,
greed, and profit. This suggests that the only value of tradition is for the
sake of self-preservation of those who honor its existence. The only change
that traditionalists want is the change that accumulates in their pockets. But
we all knew that. So why do we bother to honor politics with the time of day?
There can be only one reason: tradition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2015
(10)
- ► December 2015 (1)
- ► November 2015 (2)
- ► October 2015 (1)
- ► September 2015 (2)
- ► August 2015 (1)
- ► January 2015 (1)
-
►
2014
(23)
- ► December 2014 (7)
- ► October 2014 (1)
- ► March 2014 (5)
- ► February 2014 (2)
- ► January 2014 (5)
-
▼
2013
(11)
- ► December 2013 (1)
- ► November 2013 (1)
- ► October 2013 (1)
- ► September 2013 (3)
- ► August 2013 (1)
- ► April 2013 (1)
-
►
2012
(23)
- ► November 2012 (4)
- ► October 2012 (1)
- ► September 2012 (3)
- ► August 2012 (1)
- ► April 2012 (1)
- ► March 2012 (3)
- ► February 2012 (1)
- ► January 2012 (4)
-
►
2011
(12)
- ► December 2011 (1)
- ► September 2011 (1)
- ► August 2011 (2)
- ► April 2011 (3)
- ► February 2011 (2)
- ► January 2011 (3)
-
►
2010
(9)
- ► December 2010 (1)
- ► November 2010 (2)
- ► August 2010 (1)
- ► April 2010 (1)
- ► January 2010 (3)
-
►
2009
(21)
- ► December 2009 (1)
- ► November 2009 (2)
- ► October 2009 (5)
- ► August 2009 (4)
- ► April 2009 (3)
- ► March 2009 (2)
-
►
2008
(23)
- ► October 2008 (2)
- ► August 2008 (1)
- ► April 2008 (1)
- ► February 2008 (5)
- ► January 2008 (7)
-
►
2007
(18)
- ► December 2007 (4)
- ► September 2007 (1)
- ► August 2007 (1)
- ► April 2007 (4)
Popular Posts
-
Yes there are way more films released than any one person can possibly see. But there are 7 billion people in the world. Perhaps there are...
-
Leaving Las Vegas (1995) John O’Brien (novel) Mike Figgis (screenplay and director) with Nicolas Cage and Elizabeth Shue Scene INT....
-
SE: Jon first off I want to thank you for this opportunity to gain insight into the life and methods of a renown working screenwriter. JR...
-
Yes? Is this Larry? Who's calling? I'm Wendy Ferguson, with Mutual Applied Assistance Care. We show you listed at 458 Temple ...
-
Full Movie:
-
That was you? Hey, I was just having some fun man. You busted open a major corporation. It must be worth billions. What'd they ev...
-
Originally posted on the Black List Title: A Serious Man [download a PDF version of the script here ]. Year: 2009 Writing Credits:...
-
You look familiar. You come here often? What? Are you kidding? No. Seriously. It's like a deja vu or something. Does that line ever ...