Rudyard Kipling: Prelude to Departmental Ditties

Prelude

To “Departmental Ditties”

1885

by Rudyard Kipling

I have eaten your bread and salt
I have drunk your water and wine.
The deaths ye died I have watched beside,
And the lives ye led were mine.

Was there ought that I did not share
In vigil or toil or ease,–
One joy or woe that I did not know,
Dear hearts across the seas?

I have written the tale of our life
For a sheltered people’s mirth,
In jesting guise, but ye are wise,
And ye know what the jest is worth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RELATED

The Meaning of The Comforters by Rudyard Kipling

Posted in Poetry | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Tall Phlox and the Insects Who Love It

Tall Phlox and Insects

It’s August already, and all the tall phlox blossoms are aging and fading away. But we had a great season for tall phlox this July, and I have enjoyed watching the insects that were drawn to the phlox.

There is the hummingbird moth.

The first time I spotted a clearwing hummingbird moth, I really thought it was a bird. But no, just parallel evolution.

There is the gorgeous pipevine swallowtail.

And then there is also the red spotted purple that just pretends to be a pipevine swallowtail, but has no tail at all.

There is the giant bumblebee.

And there are the blossoms themselves.

Did you know the tall phlox made an appearance in a verse of In Case There’s  Fox?

 

Posted in Animals and Pets, Flowers, Plants | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reviewing the Korean Drama Start-Up 스타트업

“Young entrepreneurs aspiring to launch virtual dreams into reality compete for success and love in the cutthroat world of Korea’s high-tech industry.” That’s how Start-Up is summed up by Netflix.

The Korean drama is far from an expose of high tech startups.  Start-Up (스타트업) is intended for a young audience and is structured as a romantic comedy. Some of the questions it seeks to answer are:

  • What makes someone a good CEO?
  • Why does the technical genius who creates the product not get to run the company?
  • Why is the person who writes the best love letters not chosen by the woman who falls in love with  the persona he creates?
  • Should grandmothers foster financiers?
  • Should entrepreneurs look both ways before they cross the street?
  • What do you want: to write code or run the company? Because you can’t do both.

Okay, this last one was not really a question. It is kind of the moral of the story. While Start-Up is fairly light weight comedy, it has some value in exploring the issues mentioned above.

Join Julia Hanna and me on July 30, 2021 at 8:45 pm CDT to hear a discussion of the show.

 

Posted in Money, Movies and Films | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Head of the Ape Academy

This is an essay that my late father, Amnon Katz, wrote in 1986.  I have translated the text here from the original Hebrew.

The Head of the Ape Academy

It is generally accepted and known that a scientist sometimes has to restrain himself and not publish openly the results of his research. The reasons for this are to be found in the practical value of his finding, the material utility that it can provide to an enemy or a rival, and in the material damage that it can cause in the hands of the masses.

When Giordano Bruno and Galileo Galilei stood before the judges of the Inquisition (the first in 1592 and the second in 1633) the motive for silencing their voice was entirely different.

Few then could envision a practical use or any material damage from the awareness of the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe. The damage that was foreseen was spiritual, as in “he looked at it and got hurt.” [This is a reference to the Talmudic story of “Four Entered the Orange Grove”, about being hurt by too much exposure to knowledge or light.] The Church Elders were concerned (with good reason) that the new scientific knowledge would change the world view of the masses and would shake the spiritual foundations on which the social order of the middle ages was built.

Nowadays, these are not the motives that require scientists to be silent — in the natural sciences. But in the humanities?

More than seventeen years ago, my article “The Ancient Hebrew World” was published (Haaretz Jan. 31, 1969). The article engendered a lot of responses. The sharpest and most prominent of them came from the pen of the late Professor I. Kutcher (Haaretz July 2, 1969) who wrote:

A young Israeli scientist, a professor of nuclear physics at the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot, lectured at the Weizmann Institute from an opening chapter from the lecture on the subject of Israel Whence and Whither and published in “Culture and Literature’ (Jan 31, 1969) under the title “The Ancient Hebrew World”. It turns out that in this lecture he set out to teach on a number of topics  — Hebrew Bible, Hebrew linguistics, the history of the ancient orient, mythology and more. What is equally true about all of these subjects is that they are not the subject of his research at the Weizmann Institute.

Today it is accepted that the days have passed when a Jew could learn all seven wisdoms while standing on one foot, as suggested by Mendele the Bookseller, from the book “Shadow of the World” , which contains all seven wisdoms in seven small pages, as the slackers of Slackerville supposed. [Reference to Shalom Yacov Abramowitz].

This is the consistent tenor of Kutcher’s words.

What would Professor Katz say about these kinds of research methods in his own field;  if a professor of Hebrew language were to write a “scientific” article on a topic from the field of nuclear physics…

I read all of Professor Kutcher’s words from beginning to end, and I did not find in them any substantive criticism of my article. He did not attack any specific point, and also did not deny the truth of the general conclusion. Quite to the contrary, at times he seemed to strengthen my claims: “The amusing thing is that indeed (by chance!) Professor Katz is right: there are cities with Canaanite names on the coasts of the Mediterranean…”

A few months later, I chanced to lecture on the same topic at the Weiss Auditorium in Jerusalem. After the lecture a few people from the audience approached me to exchange ideas. Among them was a young man (his name, sadly, I can’t remember) who introduced himself as a student of Professor Kutcher. The student confirmed that his professor did not disagree with the factual content of my words, but rather he questioned my right to say them.

There is no doubt that Professor Kutcher was better versed in the topic than I was, more expert than I to explore it, and if he himself had wanted to explain the topic to the public, my own words would have been superfluous. But Professor Kutcher did not want to.

Several years went by until I understood the stance of Professor Kutcher of the humanities and his motives. Perhaps the best way to explain them is by an example, taken from the movie Planet of the Apes (1968, Fox Twentieth Century, based on Pierre Boulle’s French book).

A spaceship that goes out to explore new worlds lands by accident on earth after  “time travel.” Meanwhile civilization on earth has collapsed, and in its place an ape society has arisen — gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans. The apes have adopted certain foundations of the human culture that preceded them. They ride horses, shoot with guns, live in houses. They can speak and also read and write. In the area of physiology they have gotten as far as experiments in brain surgery. Compared to them, the remnants of humanity have regressed to the  state of wild animals. They cannot speak and have no tools (like the yahoo from Gulliver’s travels in the land of the horses.)

The spaceship crashes in a desert-like area. After a long trek the astronauts arrive at a watering hole and they bathe in it. There they are joined by a troop of humans. After a while the apes show up and capture the entire troop and the astronauts among them. At this point the protagonist is indistinguishable from the other humans that surround him. He is naked just like them, because he took his clothes off to bathe, all of his equipment has been lost and even the ability to speak has been taken from him, because a bullet from the hunters has struck his throat. He finds himself in a cage, and the apes who oversee him treat him like an animal.

The protagonist succeeds — by tracing letters on sand — in drawing the attention of a female zoologist who is studying the human animals. She is a young and brilliant chimpanzee. Her research has already convinced her that the human animals have a potential for intelligence. Her boyfriend, a male chimpanzee, is an archaeologist. His discoveries point to the conclusion that the culture  of the apes developed from a human civilization that preceded it — a conclusion that most of the apes find hard to even imagine. The two chimpanzee researchers are very  happy with this unusual human  they have found who advances their research.

The two chimpanzee researchers are directly answerable in their work to the head of the science academy. He is an old and dignified orangutan, a figure whose depth is not easy to fathom (played under the ape mask by Maurice Evans.) Intelligence and wisdom are reflected clearly from all his actions. There is no doubt that he understands all too well the discoveries of the young chimpanzees and their significance. When he brings up certain questions or points out missing links in the interpretation of the discoveries, he is always right. Every meeting between him and the young researchers appears legitimate. But the sum total of his interventions  is suspicious. The consistent result is a disruption of the research. When the protagonist, whose ability to speak is returning. is about to be relegated to physiological experiments involving brain surgery (and this fate has already befallen his fellow astronauts who can now no longer speak), the young researchers rebel and flee with the astronaut.

Toward the end of the movie a decisive confrontation takes place between the researchers and the head of the academy. They meet in a cave in the forbidden zone. The cave contains an archeological discovery — a doll  that looks like a human, not an ape — that proves unequivocally that the earlier civilization belonged to humans and not apes. At this point we might expect the old orangutan to fawn on the young chimpanzees and to admit that they had been right all along. He does not do this, not because he doubts the truth of their conclusions, but because he has never doubted. The new discovery is not new for him. He has known it for years and restrained himself from divulging it for deep reasons which for him were paramount.

The young researchers saw in science a goal in itself and believed implicitly that exposing the truth is always for the best. The head of the academy, who was charged with overseeing science for the sake of society and in its name, accepted the ape society and its rules as the highest values that he, the academy and even science itself must serve. The conflict between the researchers and their supervisor did not reflect a disparity of knowledge or understanding, of scientific outlook or methodology. It was a conflict of values. The head of the academy, like Solon of Lydia, was willing to hide and silence any scientific truth, if he saw in it a danger to the spiritual foundations of the society of the apes. One of these foundations was the belief in the superiority of apes over man. Even though the head of the academy knew there was no truth to this,  he forced himself to be silent in order not to deprive the ape nation of the peace of mind inherent in that belief. And because he required himself to be silent, he did not look kindly on the uninhibited zeal for the truth of his underlings.

Today the natural sciences have been disconnected from ideology and world view. In any event, those dealing in these sciences are usually free from societal and moral pressure. Not so the scholars in the humanities. These are still mulling over sensitive and controversial topics and are torn between the subject of their work and their social affiliation.

These were, therefore, the genuine motives of Professor Kutcher. That is why he sought to silence me without getting into a substantive discussion, without contradicting my words and without offering an alternative version of the facts. It was not just about the factual issues that we didn’t disagree, but also about their projected effect on society. I hoped, as Professor Kutcher feared, that revealing the facts would send shock waves to the foundation of Israeli society. I saw in this shock an opportunity for a change of direction in order to open up for Israel the bright future that she deserves.

Grand Prairie, Texas, June 22, 1986.

Amnon Katz

A Video of Me Reading the Essay

The Original Essay In Hebrew

 

Page 1

Page 2

 

Page 3

Also by Amnon Katz: Greater than Ourselves

About the Author

Amnon Katz was a physicist, an aerospace engineer, a pilot, an essayist and poet, as well as a member of the Canaanite movement in Israel.

 

 

Posted in Apes and Language, Movies and Films, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Review of “The King’s Letters”, a Movie About Hangul

Hangul chosongul fontembed.svg

By metalslick – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63996191

“The King’s Letters”   (나랏말싸미) is a historical Korean drama released in July of 2019. Set in Joseon dynasty, it tells the story of how Sejong the Great went about creating the Korean alphabet, Hangul (한글 ).

Yesterday, Julia Hanna and I joined Kate Gladstone for a review of the movie.

The King’s Letters is not everyone’s cup of tea. It is less popular than many other Korean movies, but if you are interested in the history of the Korean writing system, it is a must see.

Was the invention of Hangul influenced by Buddhist monks who already were armed with phonetic knowledge they drew from the the Devanagari? Was the credit for the invention of the writing system given to Chinese leaning Confucians? These are some of the questions raised by this unusually intellectual movie.

Posted in Language, Movies and Films, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Last Thirty Minutes of A Painting

How do you know when a painting is done? Earlier this week I wrote about what happens during the first thirty minutes of painting.

Now that I have finished the portrait, I want to talk about the final moments of painting.

A Portrait in Summer

After all, any painting could always be improved upon. How can you ever know that you are done? For me, it is an internal feeling of diminishing returns coupled with the satisfaction of the subject of my portrait.

Having a more critical subject is not always a bad thing. Constructive criticism helps us improve. My internal voice tells me that a painting is done when I recognize the person that I painted. But issues such as symmetry and smoothness of execution are also valid concerns. It sometimes helps to have someone lend us an eye, and then we can learn to improve even more.

When is a painting done? When there is a consensus between artist and subject that it is well executed and pleasing to the eye.

Posted in Arts & Crafts | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The First 30 Minutes of an Acrylic Painting

Sometimes I post a “work in progress” on my Instagram. It may look something like this:

As you can clearly see, the painting looks blotchy and uneven. The different shades are not blended together. But this only represents the beginning stages of a work. In fact, that is the result of the first thirty minutes of painting.

In the first thirty minutes I establish how the figure will be situated on the canvas, I outline the general shape of the figure and I start to color in areas of light and shade so as to show the topography of the flesh through contrasts between light and dark.

What is missing, and what will be filled in throughout the rest of the week, is the smoother blending in of the contrasts. People think that as you work on a painting you might be adding more detail. While that can sometimes  happen, what I am striving to do the most is to subtract excessive detail. I start with  exaggerated lines and contrasts. In reality, things are more subtle. Trying to more nearly mimic reality is striving for less detail.

Posted in Arts & Crafts, Beauty | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The Definition of Treason Under American Law

Recently, political disputants and the mainstream media have taken to calling people who disagree with government officials and government mandates traitors. Traitors would be people who commit treason, a very serious crime.

But under the United States constitution treason is defined very narrowly. And the people throwing about the label of traitor are not even pretending that the strict definition in Article 3, section 3 has been met.

The first person most Americans think of when we hear the term treason is Benedict Arnold. His betrayal is so notorious that his name has become synonymous with treason. “Don’t be a Benedict Arnold!” people sometimes say.

Benedict Arnold was in fact a turncoat. He changed sides during the revolutionary war. First he abjured his loyalty to King George and signed up at Valley Forge to serve under George Washington. Later when commanding American forces at West Point he changed his mind and began serving the British again. Was Benedict Arnold a traitor against Britain when he served under George Washington? Or was a he a traitor against the United States when he went back to serving King George? It is really a matter of point of view, as the famous lines by John Harrington illustrate: “Treason never prospers. What’s the reason? If it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

John Harrington

The controlling case about the application of the constitutional definition of treason is United States v. Aaron Burr. Aaron Burr was acquitted. Nothing that he did by mustering forces against Mexico could be construed as treason against the United States.

He was however found guilty of violating The Neutrality Act, a statute that denies Americans the right to wage war on their own or to serve in a foreign army. The Neutrality Act is of dubious constitutionality and still poses dilemmas for naturalized American citizens to this very day.

However, despite the Neutrality Act’s prohibition on serving in a competing army or serving another potentate, one thing is clear from the oath administered to new citizens: allegiance of American citizens is to the constitution and not the government of the United States. Therefore, rebellion against the government is not necessarily treason. In the United States, we recognize the difference between sedition and treason, as well as the difference between rebellion and treason. Yet there are certain factions currently in control of our mainstream media who seek to blur that distinction.

Julia Hanna and I discussed this on our livestream.

If you would like to learn more about Aaron Burr and the Neutrality Act, read my book, Theodosia and the Pirates.

 

Posted in Opinion Pieces and Editorials, Penal Code and Incarceration, Politics and Philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Letter from Amnon Katz to the Canaanites

Recently I visited my mother, and she gave me a copy of an old letter my father sent to the Canaanite leadership in January of 1978. My father died on October 3, 2000. Most of the Canaanite leaders were much older than he was. The paper on which the letter was printed is yellowed, torn and full of holes. Before it disappears, I decided to share what he wrote.

The letter was in Hebrew. I have added an English translation.

 

Grand Prairie, Texas

January 15, 1978

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             SECRET: Anyone who hands over this document to the enemies of Canaan will be put to death and his corpse thrown to the dogs.

 

To the faithful of Canaan wherever they may be,

I am addressing you in order to point out a way to realize Canaanism that we have neglected so far. This way is to turn directly to the inhabitants of Judea, Samaria and other areas in order to arouse and organize them, until they themselves will rise up and demand their rights to a Hebrew education and full Israeli citizenship.

I became conscious that this way is possible thanks to my meeting with “Ali” (not his real name)  —  a young man from one of the “Arab” settlements in Judea. Ali was introduced to me here in Texas by an American acquaintance.  We exchanged a few words in Hebrew and then went back to speaking English. A short while before I had explained Canaanism to the American. I knew that he saw the encounter between me and the Palestinian a test of Canaanism. When Ali started a sentence with: “I’m an Arab…” I interrupted him and asked: “What do you mean when you say that you are an Arab? Did you ancestors come to Israel from Arabia?”

“No.”

“You are not an Arab,” I told him. “You are a local from Israel.” The young man agreed and said that he would like to be simply Israeli. I told him that, in my opinion, that is exactly what he should be. When he heard this, Ali came over and hugged me.

Since then I continued to muse over the nature of the Judean. I found that his loyalty to Israel was deep and fundamental. This feeling springs from the preference for Israeli society over that of the neighboring countries, because of the human relations and honoring the individual that are to be found in Israel. If he could, he would want to assimilate and to become well versed in Israeli society, and would be happy to defend Israel and to put his life in peril serving it.

Because Ali was from the “territories”, Israeli institutions from IDF to the Hebrew University, are closed to him. In contrast, his cousin is serving in an Israeli armored unit. Ali tells of his cousin’s bravery with pride, about his courage and his exploits for Israel in the battles of ’73. The mother of his cousin is from Judea, but his father is from the Negev. For this reason the cousin is deemed  an “Israeli Beduin”, and IDF is open to him. Ali is considered an Arab from the territories, and everything is closed to him.

Ali received an education in Arabic.  His Hebrew is poor. He is not familiar with the Hebrew Bible — he has never even heard of King Saul. The draw of Israel for him is based on territorial belonging, on the preference for Israeli society, and, since our meeting, the awareness that his place of origin is Israel and not Arabia. From the entire theory of Canaanism, he currently understands only “The Arabs Who Are in the Land of Israel.” Even this he has not read because of the language barrier.

In all this the identification with Israel and the newfound awareness of his “Jewish” origin is a deep and strong motive for Ali. He was very hurt when he heard Begin (on TV) mention “Palestinian Arabs”  and was on the verge of sending an open letter of protest. This letter and also other plans that I had for him were not put into effect. The immediate reason was fear of retaliation against his family by the PLO. A deeper reason is that Ali is in the process of emigrating to the United States, and a large portion of his family has already emigrated here before him.

In Israel there are many left who are just like him. If you reach them in time, you could find in them the leverage that we lacked all these years. From a historical perspective, isn’t this the natural way? It is normal that those who have been annexed fight for their rights (e.g. Rome.)

The people you will turn to in this scenario are far from having a Hebrew education and background. The thesis needs to be fitted to the understanding of the recipients. At first, we should concentrate on the origin of the inhabitants of Israel and Lebanon, and the material has to be available in Arabic. We need an Arabic translation of “The Arabs Who Are in the Land of Israel.” The current preference for Israeli society will do the rest.

In expressing these things I am concerned that some of you will see in my words arrogance and self-aggrandizement. I am afraid you will look askance at my giving you — who are greater than me in years, in wisdom and in Canaanism — advice and “instructions” from afar. Please, my brothers, don’t. It is not for me or for my honor that I write these things. Only for the love Canaan and as the gods command I write. Therefore, forget me, remember Canaan, and do each whatever he can for the motherland.

The gods be with you,

Amnon Katz

 

מכתב מאמנון כץ לכנענים

מכתב מאמנון כץ אל הכנענים

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Politics and Philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Triggered! Why You Have Not Seen a Libertarian Musical Yet!

 

Have you been wondering: Why are all the musicals I have ever seen pandering to statists? Why isn’t there a libertarian musical? One reason might be that the funding for theater productions nowadays all comes from 501 (c) (3) compliant nonprofits. This is true whether it is a local community theater production or a Broadway play. Making an honest profit off art is not how it happens. I am sure people profit, but even Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century admits that the growing divide between haves and have-nots comes in the form of income inequality, not capital accumulation. In other words, your salary can be as big as you like, when you are the one setting it. But your company will show no profit.

If I offer The Debt Collector to local community productions, which are usually run by devout Mormons with credentials from Julliard, I am told that the sexy songs are too sexual.

“Have you seen Les Miserables?” I ask. “Do you think that Fantine’s downfall is not much more explicit?”

“What passes muster on Broadway is not okay for Main Street America,” I am told.

“But what about Annie? Annie is for kids. Have you seen Carol Burnett’s Miss Hannity? Have your children seen her?”

“That’s different.”

Why is that different? How is it different? Could it be because that show enshrines FDR?  I personally would have loved to see Miss Hannity get it on with Daddy Warbucks. They are, after all, both statists.

And then there is the whole anti-Landlord thing.  Why, oh, why is “Master of the House ” not offensive, when songs like “Law Abiding People” are triggering?

Because it is not fair to the underclasses to make fun of them? Then why does the guy who sings “Master of the House” have a cockney accent? Your disdain for the newly risen and adulation for aristocrats is scarcely hidden, Mister Liberal-Minded Intellectual.

We have a problem. Every musical I know of caters to the same ideology, and nobody, left or right of center, is doing a thing to change it.

 

Related

https://www.pubwages.com/26/an-extended-synopsis-of-the-debt-collector

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Movies and Films, Music, Musical Styles, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment