I’ve been reading around in Greek literature for a
psychology class. I keep bumping into
works that seems to still resonate in our language and culture, and not only
during the Olympic season: Hubris,
Nemesis, and Hamartia. All have currency
in our language except hamartia, which means falling short. In his Poetics, Aristotle defined hamartia as
a “fatal flaw” brought about by ignorance or a mistake. I don’t think the eight badminton players
booted out of the Olympics for cheating can hide behind the idea of hamartia,
perhaps because hundreds of millions of people worldwide were watching their
comic and slow-motion antics in real time.
At this time, their motivations seem closer to mendacity.
It would be tempting to transition now to the story of the
New Yorker writer Jonah Lehrer, who admitted to fabricating quotes for Imagine,
a book about Bob Dylan, but Aristotle would probably not approve of a
predictable commentary, already abundant on the web. Most writers and editors have fallen short at
one time or the other. I did when I was
a new and young editor of Bicycling magazine. By virtue of an advertising and promotion deal
with Olympic sponsor, the Southland Corporation/7-Eleven stores, Bicycling had
a closer relationship with the 1984 Los Angeles Games than would usually be the
case. It was a very good event for cycling
as Americans won nine medals. This
narrative was later tarnished when we learned that some cycling team members
had “blood doped” to increase red cell counts. It was Sports Illustrated, the Rolling Stone,
and others that made this story public. Bicycling was too cozy with the sponsor, the
cycling federation, and the good news Olympics.
My editor, who was at the Games, was slow to bring this to my attention
and I was slow to act on editorial and management issues. I fell short of the mark.
Like most Americans, I have followed the Penn State scandal
with horror and sadness. I learned the
other day that the football stadium in Happy Valley seats more than 106,000
fans or around three times the population of State College, where the
university is located. It is now easy to
see this as a massively grotesque and symbolic overhang, representing the
collective Football Hubris that was in plain sight. But that was not my opinion on numerous trips
to State College to visit family and friends and work on projects with PSU
professors. I bought into the official
narrative.
Jack McCallum is one of my favorite Sports Illustrated
writers. McCallum wrote a piece about Coach
Jerry Sandusky after his curtain call as coach before a game against Michigan
State, November 13, 1999. He would then
move on to the Second Mile charity. McCallum
wrote: “If Sandusky did not have such a human side, there would be temptations
around Happy Valley to canonize him. Saint Sandusky, leader of linebackers,
molder of men.”
In fairness to McCallum, he was quick to write on November
8, 2011, after the scandal broke: “Jerry Sandusky fooled a lot of people over
the years-including me.” He recalled
that Sandusky didn’t seem at all joyful about what he was doing. Penn
State might have been on the moon. It
was a “perfect place for a predator like Sandusky.” The author was not the only one to feel like a
“jerk” after the truth came to light.
Everyone associated with this scandal seems to have fallen
short in one way or another. McCallum’s
narrative is actually far less extravagant than some of the pieces coming out
of the Philadelphia newspapers at the time, though it’s clear that the mention
of sainthood sticks in the writer’s craw.
As writers we live in a hyperbolic world and are tempted, in
the words of Flannery O’Connor, to draw large and startling figures, an
observation she offered with her usual pinch of irony. I’ve read with interest and sadness the saga
about the Vogue article by Joan Juliet Buck published in March, 2011, about
Asma al-Assad, wife of the President of Syria. The Daily Beast and Newsweek have done a
masterful job on this story.
This would not have been such a big story if the Arab Spring
and government retributions had not begun in early 2011. The public response was withering. Vogue pulled the story, entitled “A Rose in the
Desert,” from its web site, fired Buck and offered an apology.
Mrs. Assad probably would not have been the subject of the
Vogue “Power Issue” if she wasn’t very attractive, born and educated in
England, and according to French Elle in 2009, one of the best-dressed women in
the world. Paris Match suggested she was an “element of
light in a country full of shadowy zones.” The PR firm behind the Vogue story said that
the President “speaks English and his wife is hot.” She was ripe for celebrity treatment.
Author Buck claims that Mrs. Assad duped her, presumably
expecting the focus of the interview to be more about Syrian culture,
antiquities and museums than politics. Joan
Buck does note in her article some of the darkness of the regime, such as a
prison on wheels, but the article overall suggests, in Tina Brown’s words, that
the author drank “the Vogue Kool-Aid.” In
my time at Hachette, then publisher of Elle, I had an occasional whiff of that
wine.
James Hillman, one the most interesting psychologists and
philosophers of the last fifty years, published an essay, “Aphrodite’s
Justice,” shortly before his death in 2011, about the relationship between
ethics and aesthetics. In his view, we
cannot separate beauty from morality, “since beauty works as a calling to
better things, pulling at the heart to love, to the mind to imagine more
vividly.”
Aphrodite is not only just another pretty face. Nemesis is part of her constellation and
stands ready with a kind of righteous anger, to return order to the cosmos.
No comments:
Post a Comment