Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Banter 52: Shame

Topic:  Shame
Friday, Nov. 15th at 6:30pm
Host:  at Mitch's apartment



The topic began as a suggestion for a shame performance night, and then settled into simply shame (or possibly shame vs. guilt); do feel welcome to perform your shame if you'd like though, amid the varied threads of discussion.

Here are some tidbits to get us started:

Shame Culture vs. Guilt Culture:   https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/opinion/the-shame-culture.html


Brene Brown on shame; TED talk


Materials from members of the group will be forthcoming and posted below the week before we meet.


From Sabine:

I'm interested in so many angles from which we might look at the idea and feelings of shame.  I hope some of the others of you will pull in collective/societal shame, psychology of shame, etc.  What I'll focus on is the way we work out our societal and individual shame via the arts. Sometimes the only thing to ease the absolute, oppressive, crushing nature of shame in the body and psyche is to stop holding it in, give it voice.  Whether as a writer, a visual artist, a performance artist, or the reader/audience taking it in so much shame has been aired out and the awful, lonely, scary feelings of shame validated, and perhaps made less crushing by the arts.  How lucky are we to have these platforms as humans to deal with ourselves and all we are capable of feeling and making others feel.

Read this first:  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jun/08/top-10-books-about-guilt

Then read this, which was first experienced, then drowned under, then penned into a book of rough-hewn poems as a method of survival, some of which have been performed on a stage in front of several hundred via theatrical monologue, which completed the cycle of this shame (along with beginning tentative healing), and some of which are still in draft form (with associated shame awaiting its turn for revision too):


Poem for the Bunnies (draft iii)

for Naya

by Sabine Brigette (orig. April 27, 2016, audio)



I.



There is a scene in The Tale of the Flopsy Bunnies where Mr. MacGregor scoops in his palm each of the flopsy bunnies out of the hay pile, or grass clippings pile, rather.  And he does it so gently. 



II.



There’s this tender tenderness to the scooping.  But, of course, his intentions are not kind.  The tenderness of scooping a sleeping, cozy, sure little rabbit out of one area and tucking it into another area safely—well, in this case, it is not safe, it is a sack, and the sack is headed to his kitchen; the threat was real for us too—I suppose that’s my interest in the scene.



III.



I wish I could remember scooping you from the walled in scene we found ourselves.  My hands cupped so you would have slept through his scary + my mute, and through my collapse after.  Oh that I could have sheltered more, carried the darkened wholly myself, and delivered you safely from it to soft-hued light and a bird song ending. 



IV.



You and your sister and me, we are safe now.  We delivered ourselves, though you remember all of it, and she, none of it.  And so, for you + me, the lingering hollow still follows from that chapter.  There were two objects that I actually could have scooped to safety in my two cupped hands, but they were the very things that I absolutely did not, and that I personally delivered to harm, the bunnies.  In this case, not the sweetly drawn flopsy bunnies held in a book for the first time by your chubby 3-year old hands on an airplane back from Bangkok, but our Mr. MacGregor and our Strawberry, our own wee flopsy bunnies.  The Holland lop-eared rabbits you showed at the fair when you were eleven.



V.



Elder daughter, whose arms got bruised, who I left alone in all that heat, builder of ladders, if I could, believe me, I would reach back—like added pages of drawings to a children’s story—my two hands into that chapter that runs my blood cold. The very first thing I would scoop are your bunnies, right out of the forest.  Let them have one hour there for a few glorious leaps of joy, then reach down, scoop, and deliver them safely to our yard to you.  Wake you now, soon to leave, and tell you the good news of who came home before you go.







VI.



But the bunnies are the ones that got left behind. It is an unscoopable thing that I carry like a burden sack.  Yet, childlike, when I hike in those woods with the dogs, I look for them still.  Then on the way back across the river where we dug their carrot-lined warren I try to set the shame down before I return home.  I remind myself of all the times he said how they’d taste for dinner, and how he sounded when he said he could do what he wanted with any of us. Like you, I know what he is capable of.  I often thought we would all get left behind, not just them strewn with weasel-punctured necks in a forest.  When I grow brave and visit the empty warren, agitated by my own hope, I recall your shriek and my firm voice for you not to look, not to look, and hugging you and hugging you.  Maybe it was another rabbit who lay lifeless in leaves, I had said.  Your faith in me heart-breakingly unshaken, you did not look.  Fact is we both know for certain that one of the bunnies did not make it past a full day.  Other fact is I felt safer in the woods that day, despite your sorrow in my arms at what I’d done, than I had or would for years. 



VII.



I had been trying to build us all a safe warren to huddle in together, away from predators, as I scooped out the dirt by hand in their warren to reveal a beautiful tree-root ceiling the week before.  The boards I placed at their entryway were with loving hands that had only ever held them gently.  The moss and straw I laid inside, winter coming, I imagined keeping us warm too from the cold our life had become.  The carrots and rabbit pellets I heaped in their imagined kitchen, their own start to Watership Down, more chance than we would have for a good life when we had to leave the quiet of the woods beside trickling stream, where water would be plentiful for them, even if they woke in winter.  I was in a sack and could see very little in the dark of it. But for keeping hold of your hand and hers, I lost hold of everything else.



VIII.



They were deeply loved.



IX.



You were so little and had no say. I am so very sorry.



X.



Remember “happy baby,” the way they leaped the first time we let them into our backyard as babies?  I do. And when I can’t, I try to.


Mitch's Contribution:

This is a heavy topic so I looked for something short and funny.

Apologies that it's an advertisement.

Public humiliation is different than shame, but there is nothing more cringe worthy for me to see.  When I speak or perform and it doesn't go well, it leads to incredible, lifelong personal feelings of shame for me...I have terrible stage fright for that reason.  That said, I guess inducing shame (humorously) for a good cause (the environment) can be beneficial...at least I thought this ad was a form of 'positive shaming', if there is such a thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll22B4VcGPQ




Thursday, October 3, 2019

Banter 51: Motherhood and Defeasible Duties to Benefit

Thursday, October 17th at 6:30pm
at Annette's and Kirk's house


Motherhood and defeasible duties to benefit is a philosophical and cultural problem that contemporary philosopher Fiona Woollard is concerned with in her current research and writing.  


(A quasi comedic, short lecture of Woollard's at a comedy club about this topic.)

I had the good luck of attending a lecture of hers in Oxford this past April (due to picking up a newspaper blowing past in a park as Edel played and seeing the event began in 45 minutes). It was fascinating to note the discomfort of various audience members around me for having dragged my six-year old to the lecture (a familiar feeling in Oxford, for last time I'd been there I had a 9-10 year old Naya hanging onto my apron-strings with confused onlookers at formal dinners in Christ Church hall, etc.); what kind of mother was I, what kind of mothering was I offering, shouldn't this child's needs come first, shouldn't the adult-oriented event come first above this mother's needs to attend if no childcare is at hand; or, perhaps they squirmed and stared in our direction for other reasons, wishing they'd or others had brought their children too (doubtful, though Edel did hang in there pulling off her childhood duties to benefit her mother, haha). Fiona, however, stared at Edel or alternately at me for lengthy periods when making various points about her argument, and seemed to have a soft set to her face in so doing, one of fascination and philosophical observation perhaps.  Risking an egocentric take on her gaze, it did please me greatly to think of her mind to be the sort that would connect these obvious dots.



Woollard summarizes:


"A recurring mistake influences discussion of the behaviour of pregnant women and mothers.  The mistake in question is the assumption that a mother who fails to do something that might benefit her child must be able to provide over-riding countervailing considerations to justify her decision.  It is assumed that in the absence of such a justification the mother is liable for moral criticism.  We see this assumption operating in academic literature, medical advice given to mothers, mainstream media and social media.  

I argue that this mistaken assumption involves attributing to the mother a defeasible duty to perform each action that might benefit her child.  This attribution is supported by implicit appeal to two arguments, both of which are initially appealing but ultimately unsound.

My first paper on this topic, which lays out the general philosophical issues is called 'Motherhood and Mistakes about Defeasible Duties to Benefit'.  It has been published at Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.  If you don't have access to PPR, you can download a author's draft of the paper at Publications and Works in Progress." (click on links embedded in this previous line)

It may help to review the concepts of defeasible reasoning also here:  https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasoning-defeasible/#DefeConvComm

For this banter session, we can start with perhaps the specifics of what Woollard is concerned with and then expand outward or sideways to include other related issues as the group is interested in about defeasible duties, cultural/societal expectations that are constricting, motherhood, our own limiting ideas on our own duties or the duties of others.