Great read, Allen. I hate to detract from a complex article with so much to say on gender, art and human sensitivities, but the following caught my attention:
"Slater traces the demise of the Victorian world, with its reliance on honor and paternalism—the old social code—and the rise of a new world order based on coercion and fear—the new code"
The honour and loyalty of paternalistic order are never discussed, which is unfortunate since such discussion is paramount in a world that still seems to insist that hard work and the merits of your achievements will stand you in good stead. Meanwhile, this system has been replaced by certification and the obedience requisite to purchase (rather than earn) said certification. Indeed the new code is coercion and fear brought about through social (intersectional) hierarchy and threats to one's livelihood if one doesn't comply with disruptive policies that often run counter to paternalistic ethics. We no longer have to earn our way into society through hard knocks and proof of our mettle, but via sycophantic strategies that demonstrate a readiness to jump through bureaucratic hoops without rocking any boats. And this whole approach is meant to turn workplaces into communities of fear and surveillance without humour or love. And from the educational facility, the workplace, and via social media, this unethical new ethics radiates like a dirty bomb, poisoning all of society. Not a great moment for those who value inner development and personal responsibility.
Yes, I see. At the last minute I cut the following elaboration of Slater's view. ** He believes that the Industrial Revolution and materialism destroyed honor-based culture. Today nobody would “voluntarily chain himself to a machine because its [sic] ‘Honorable’” (p. 338). ** Slater is speaking in a military context, but as you say his view extends beyond that. I'll think about your comment and look for a way to accommodate it. Thanks for bringing up this point.
I think what bothers me the most about Lt. Gen. Slater's dismissal of honor (done in by machines, he says) is that it strips work of its value for the worker. As a general he doesn't have to think about the value of fighting to soldiers: he is content to control them by fear. Having no fellow-feeling for his subordinates (even though he wants to be on a first-name with them basis over drinks, but only there), he can't imagine that their fellow-feeling for each other is what motivates men in battle. Arrogant and superior, he is no more than a useful idiot, himself controlled by the fear he uses to control everybody else. He doesn't understand that machines take skill to use. Planes are harder to fly than horses are to ride (says a man who does neither of these, I should add).
All excellent points. Indeed planes are harder to fly than horses are to ride, but one can have a genuine fellow-feeling for a horse that's more fulfilling than that with an airplane.
Great post Allen. To me, this read like a novel. You painted a great picture of the story and from that the characters came alive. Really enjoyable and of course, thought provoking. Thanks!
Great read, Allen. I hate to detract from a complex article with so much to say on gender, art and human sensitivities, but the following caught my attention:
"Slater traces the demise of the Victorian world, with its reliance on honor and paternalism—the old social code—and the rise of a new world order based on coercion and fear—the new code"
The honour and loyalty of paternalistic order are never discussed, which is unfortunate since such discussion is paramount in a world that still seems to insist that hard work and the merits of your achievements will stand you in good stead. Meanwhile, this system has been replaced by certification and the obedience requisite to purchase (rather than earn) said certification. Indeed the new code is coercion and fear brought about through social (intersectional) hierarchy and threats to one's livelihood if one doesn't comply with disruptive policies that often run counter to paternalistic ethics. We no longer have to earn our way into society through hard knocks and proof of our mettle, but via sycophantic strategies that demonstrate a readiness to jump through bureaucratic hoops without rocking any boats. And this whole approach is meant to turn workplaces into communities of fear and surveillance without humour or love. And from the educational facility, the workplace, and via social media, this unethical new ethics radiates like a dirty bomb, poisoning all of society. Not a great moment for those who value inner development and personal responsibility.
Yes, I see. At the last minute I cut the following elaboration of Slater's view. ** He believes that the Industrial Revolution and materialism destroyed honor-based culture. Today nobody would “voluntarily chain himself to a machine because its [sic] ‘Honorable’” (p. 338). ** Slater is speaking in a military context, but as you say his view extends beyond that. I'll think about your comment and look for a way to accommodate it. Thanks for bringing up this point.
Puts me in mind of The Last Samurai and the tragic replacement of skill and discipline with sloppy machine guns that any idiot can operate.
I think what bothers me the most about Lt. Gen. Slater's dismissal of honor (done in by machines, he says) is that it strips work of its value for the worker. As a general he doesn't have to think about the value of fighting to soldiers: he is content to control them by fear. Having no fellow-feeling for his subordinates (even though he wants to be on a first-name with them basis over drinks, but only there), he can't imagine that their fellow-feeling for each other is what motivates men in battle. Arrogant and superior, he is no more than a useful idiot, himself controlled by the fear he uses to control everybody else. He doesn't understand that machines take skill to use. Planes are harder to fly than horses are to ride (says a man who does neither of these, I should add).
All excellent points. Indeed planes are harder to fly than horses are to ride, but one can have a genuine fellow-feeling for a horse that's more fulfilling than that with an airplane.
Great post Allen. To me, this read like a novel. You painted a great picture of the story and from that the characters came alive. Really enjoyable and of course, thought provoking. Thanks!