Stuck (Zane Mandell)

What does it mean to be stuck? It means that you are looking at everything all wrong. The fact is you aren’t stuck; it is just that you have found something that makes you want to stop. It is that thing which you need to overcome whether it is external or internal. The narrator himself is stuck, but we shall get to that letter.

I feel it was a good thing that this reading that we chose was rather lengthy because it fit in well with understanding the topic that the narrator chooses to discuss. You must reevaluate where you are, in that reevaluation learn why you are doing what you are doing. The answer to why you are doing something is always the same, and that is ‘care’. That is the key by which you act, and its relationship with Quality is what makes ‘care’ what it is. I find this to be very interesting as the philosophic tidbit makes perfect sense, unlike plenty of the gibberish that has been previously discussed. Why do we act? Because we want to? Because we choose to? Because we are told to? All of these are encompassed by ‘care’ and the need or want for a betterment of Quality. It may not be that we care about what we do, but care about what may come as a result of it, or what may not come as a result of it. It is in fact the very reason that I am writing right now, if I did not care I would not choose to write this with Quality.

Like the narrator tends to do very often I am rambling. But I think this is important to look at deeper into himself. This brings me to a thought he has on the surface and innards of a machine. It is the surface that we must be very careful when working on, and once we get to the innards it is much easier to bang away to make the ‘machine’ work. When I read this I could not help but think about psychological studies where a doctor asks simple questions that don’t mean much on the surface but get at what is going on deeper down within the person. That is what we need to look at, as the “nightmares” about Phaedrus have continued we now know what is deeply troubling our narrator. Why he has chosen to write all this down is what I would like to get at. This, I believe, will act as a door within in to see the roots, just like those within Quality that he has been searching for the entire novel. The final portion of our reading should therefore be very revealing.

Loneliness

In this week’s reading, the narrator touches on the subject of loneliness. He claims that the most heavily populated cities on the east and west coasts are actually home to the loneliest people. It is paradoxical that the Midwest, which has far less concentrated cities, is where the less lonely reside. I think this shows that appearances and expectations are not always what they appear to be. The narrator goes on to explain that technology is largely at fault for the loneliness of citizens who live in “big coastal cities” (321). In larger cities, people are more exposed to technology, which in turn detaches them from the natural world. Urbanization heavily detracts from an individual’s touch with nature. In contrast, those in the Midwest are less exposed to urbanization, so they are more in touch with the natural world.

Technology is to blame for this type of loneliness because of the isolation that results from it. Being in Miami, we are all constantly being exposed to technology in such large amounts, to a point where it is taking over our lives. Of course, there are many benefits to technology, but there are consequences that result from it. As we are progressing into a more and more technologically-based world, our dependence on technology is growing. As can be seen today, most people are glued to their cell phones and computers, so conversation and personal interaction is limited in the presence of technology. I think this is the type of isolation that the narrator is referring to.

The narrator also speaks briefly about decision-making and its connection to Quality. I still find the topic of Quality to be a bit confusing, but the narrator’s explanations have slightly helped me in understanding his ideas. As he mentions, technology can be used to maintain friends. Using himself as an example, the narrator explains that “a person who knows how to fix motorcycles – with Quality – is less likely to run short of friends than one who doesn't” (322). When an individual becomes interested in what he or she does, then that person will become more interesting. His Quality decision, which is his good decision that is thoroughly thought out, will prove beneficial, as his friends will not view him as an object, but rather as an individual with interesting and worthwhile substance. 

Do I finally understand who Phaedrus is?

            These chapters helped me reach a sort of understanding on Phaedrus, which I never thought was possible. This I think was revealed by the plan of sending Chris home on a bus and checking into a hospital. He believes that he is mentally ill. Phaedrus could be him, but a different side of him, somewhat of a different personality. This could make sense. He left it behind and now he is a completely different person. This explains why Robert Deweese thought he had changed so much. He technically is not the same person. I may be misinterpreting the entire novel, now that I have this idea in my head, but it can somewhat make sense. This makes the entire novel easier to understand. With only a few chapters left, I think I may have figured it out.

            Something else I found interesting in these chapters was the letter that Chris was writing to his mother. Why is this the first time she has been mentioned for a significant purpose? I feel like there must be an underlying meaning to this. I also find it interesting that he cannot find anything to write about, and has to brainstorm. He is talking to his own mother! I always have something to talk about with her, shouldn’t he? It is not like he is very close to his father. This makes me feel that he is lonely. This leads the narrator into a conversation about technology. It was once considered art, or so the narrator says. Then it advanced and people who no longer cared created the modern technology. Now he considers it to be ugly. This relates to modern technology in the way that everything becomes more technological. No one needs to talk to communicate; everything is “easier”. Just imagining modern technology actively used in the novel would make the situation between the narrator and Chris worse. They would literally have nothing to talk about, enjoy together, etc. They already have a hard time connecting, and technology is making it worse now a days. I think this is interesting that it came up in the book because everyone makes it such a big deal. The older generations hate that we are so dependent on our phones and computers, but we would not be able to live in the modern world without these devices. The are beneficial in some ways, but harmful in others.

            

The Ugliness of Technology

                In these last few chapters, the narrator talks about the ugliness of technology, and how different people react differently to it. He says that “technology is simply the making of things and the making of things can’t by its own nature be ugly or there would be no possibility for beauty in the arts, which also include the making of things” (260). A person’s individual situation is what interprets how he or she will react to technology. He uses the example of a prison inmate who sees the stone walls of the jail in order to expand on the idea of an individual’s situation influencing his or her reaction. The inmate would probably not react well to technology that encompasses the use of stone, as this particular individual has been exposed to the material under a bad circumstance. To compare this negative experience to a more positive one, the narrator uses Phaedrus as an example. He says that Phaedrus saw a beautiful wall in Korea, which influenced his opinion regarding certain materials. Each individual has a different perspective, so, naturally, everyone will react in different ways to, in this case, technology.

Since there are so many components that make up technology, no one can isolate the specific attribute that makes technology “ugly”. The narrator argues that instead of avoiding technology, one should try to break down the barriers that affect the understanding of what technology truly is. Once this happens, the human spirit can successfully fuse with nature. I have to agree with the narrator’s ideas. It makes complete sense that no one can avoid technology; it is definitely omnipresent. There is no denying the fact that technology has made some definite advances in society, both for the better and the worse. Due to the varying results of scientific advances in technology, it makes sense that people would have different opinions. I completely agree with the narrator’s viewpoint on this topic. In my case, I have not really experienced anything horrible that would taint my approval of technology. That being said, I embrace technology, much like the narrator himself. If I had had a bad experience, even just regarding a material, I do feel that my opinion may differ. Everything we see and experience affects the way that we think, to such an extent that we base our opinions off of it. The way that we live our lives greatly impacts our viewpoints on all topics. 

Order

In this weeks reading the author managed to make absolute sense and absolutely no sense at that the same time. As he discussed with idea of “subliminal self” I will discuss the parts of the reading that are convenient to me and my understanding of the novel. His discussion of facts at first confused me to no end, as it seemed to confuse those who discovered the internal contradictions between scientific and mathematical laws that are meant to be absolute truths. It begins with the idea that one main truth leads to the discovery of multiple smaller, more specifics truths. This truth is referred to as a simple fact. These simple facts though vague, are the most important because they serve as the foundation for the other facts to be built upon. When one of these facts is proved to be wrong, or at least potentially wrong is disrupts all of the other facts connecting to it, potentially destroying the system. What seems to be the catch is that this fact is all true and untrue at the same time. In the creation of the facts we “discover them” out of a need for them, we subconsciously pick them. However these facts are simply definitions that humans have created to find some sort of order in the world, one that can ground us when the ever-powerful wind gust of philosophy threatens to throw us up in the air. It is the search for beauty, the classic beauty that Poincaré finds such power in. This beauty is essentially that grounding in the idea of absolute truth. The idea that there is a “harmonious order” of laws that govern the universe and keep it consistent. Without this beauty I feeling of unease threatens that psyche as we are forced to acknowledge a complete lack of control, understanding, and knowledge of what is to come. It may be that all known science is just mankind’s attempt at comforting ourselves in our uncontrollable lives. If math and science can be proven wrong then order does not exist.

Harmony (Zane Mandell)

Reading this novel is becoming more and more like wading through the thickest muck in a swamp. The narrator is going so deep into his thoughts that it is nearly impossible for the reader to follow. There are certain points where I am able to see a culmination of various thoughts and discussions but it is very challenging to follow the mindset and though process of the narrator. It is obvious that he has direction and has laid a solid foundation; I am just having trouble identifying what that is.

Having said this I was able to clearly see this major turning point in the Chautauquas dealing with Phaedrus. His study into quality found that he was looking at it all wrong. Quality is a completely separate entity, a third part of the puzzle. It couldn’t fall under the romantic mindset nor could it be placed under the classical one. So he came to conclusion that it is the midpoint by which the two are connected, it is definitely something that is there it just cannot be defined. Not only can it not be defined but Phaedrus comes to the conclusion that any attempt to defined quality undermines the whole system and renders everything invalid.

This is verbose and complex material that the narrator is trying to get at. But it seems as the narrator escapes momentarily from a Chautauqua that he is dealing with something, a problem that is rooted so deep, the narrator is not even sure whether there is a problem. This most prominently emerges in the dream that takes place in Chapter 23. It brings up different topics such as death, family, and love. We now know that the narrator is afraid, he admits to it too. He owns the idea that he has fear, while recognizing that Phaedrus and his son never show it. This brings up many pressing questions that need to be answered. But at the moment there is one that strikes me as being of the utmost importance. Why is the narrator trying to relive the past? As we have previously discussed it is obvious that he is trying to recollect the thoughts and teachings of his previous self, who he refers to as Phaedrus. But that doesn’t answer my question. What I am trying to get at is why he has chosen to go where Phaedrus lived and try to take in all of that which occurred in the past. At this moment I believe that he is seeking harmony, but not within himself. He is trying to reach peace with all of those around him, by keeping his son closest. The next step that he needs to make is realizing there is a problem within himself. Hopefully this dream will allow him to wake up.

Father and son

            These chapters really emphasized the relationship Chris and the narrator seem to have. I find it very sad, but they are not the only people who have the sort of relationship. There are many parents that do not understand their children and cannot connect to him. The first dream the narrator has is significant because it shows he is becoming aware of how distant they truly are. There is a glass door between them. He does nothing to try to open it and communicate. That is how he is acting throughout his lifetime. He says he will meet Chris on the mountaintop, where they never end up going, and the narrator speaks of symbols that represent the loss of control in their relationship. They are his fault though, and there is no one else to blame. They both need to make an effort in having a father-son relationship. But the narrator seems to always disappoint his son. It is so sad. Then they somewhat connect, and Chris begins to be burdened by the same load as his father. But Chris has this sense of competitiveness. With his own father! I do not understand what reason there is to be competitive. In whose eyes, other than in theirs, do they need to compete? This occurs as they descend from the mountain. Then the second dream caught me off guard. The same glass door was present, but the narrator was in a coffin. His family was paying their respects and he felt grateful for this. I honestly have always thought it was a given that one’s family would go and pay their respects. The narrator really wants to communicate with his son. He finds this difficult, especially due to the shadow figure, and decides to try anyways. This gave me hope in their relationship because he tried to fix it in his dream.

            Apart from the emphasis on their relationship, there is Zen, scenery, and philosophy mixed in. These are the parts of the story that I get confused. I no longer want to be confused. I want to have clarity on what is happening and understand the philosophy and thoughts behind it. I want to know more about Phaedrus. There are so many questions that I have. I want an explanation. I thought I understood the concept of Quality, but now he spoke of whether it was subjective or objective, and the fact that it is the force behind religion. How does this all correlate?