By way of explanation

File:Guide for the Perplexed by Maimonides.jpg

Moses Maimonides, the Jewish rabbi of 12th century Muslim Spain, wrote The Guide for the Perplexed.  I have always been philosophical, but with each passing year, I remain perplexed, perhaps increasingly so.  The idea of a guide out of perplexity seems a tad ambitious to me.  I remain on my journey into it.

Are you part of the solution? Popular tagline of the 60’s.

What we’re saying today is that you’re either part of the solution or
you’re part of the problem.   (Eldridge Cleaver)

 I really like political rhetoric that aspires to the lapidary.

Lichanos:  Greek for index, or forefinger.  I point the way, see?  It’s all related to ancient and esoteric classifications of harmonic scales, none of which I understand, but the writer of this blog seems to.  There’s also that Drainage business…


Yes, I am he.  Or rather,

Actually, it’s  I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together…


I have looked to the Iguana for my guidance for a long time.

12 Responses to By way of explanation

  1. Ah-ha! I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together crypto-Lennonists as I am sure you have already noticed.

  2. antonio augusto says:

    I like your blog too much. I was just wainting for some material for a video about Flaubert! When it will be ready I’ll sent a copy for you.Thanks, Antonio Augusto

  3. Man of Roma says:

    Lichanos, now I have better grasped some notions at the base of your blog.

    This tag of the 60s, ie “you’re either part of the solution or you’re part of the problem” – always appeared a bit individualistic to me, but you must have considered it when you say “I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together

    On the whole, the American period between the 60s and the 70s was not greatly individualistic – as far as I understood from my US friends in Trastevere in that period: on the contrary, I was them as they were me, no difference, or race, language, colour of skin mattered, although individualism is possibly an everlasting element of the American culture, now penetrating the young a bit here (Europe) too.

    What is called globalisation, here in Europe, is only American cultural influence. Europeam nations do not communicate with one another much, they don’t read much the respective literature. The communicate with that 15%, maybe 20% of American culture they have absorbed (theory of a Polish intellectual whose name I forgot).

    My 2 cents of blabbering today.

    • Lichanos says:

      Part of the solution or part of the problem…” That’s how it was said in the 60s, but it never made sense to me. Thus my coda, “…but what if you’re not part of the problem? Then what are you?” Everything is all mixed up.

      People I know who were involved in politics in the 60s say it was deeply individualistic, or as one put it, “a very destructive time for organizing.” The youth culture was all about self-realization and self-indulgence: communal action was an afterthought. (Excepting the civil rights movement, of course, but that’s not really the “youth culture.”)

      Individualism is a bedrock fact of America. To explain the USA, you must recall that it has two foundings: one by religious fanatics, the Puritans; and a second by Englightenment intellectuals. And in American culture, the most important elements have always been individualism and race. People don’t like to remember the latter, but racism has been central to American culture. Slaves came almost with the Puritans. The Civil War ended slavery, but it really lasted in modified form for another hundred years. So, we are only two generations or so distant from it, and it’s in the weave of all our culture.

      I’m not sure why I chose the lines from The Walrus as my URL, but I like its playing with I and you, as you note.

      • Ducky's here says:

        But what does it have to do with gem cutting?

      • Man of Roma says:

        I don’t know. American counter culture as I lived it in Trastevere didn’t seem to me that individualistic. As I said I perceived like a sense of universal brotherhood, but they were American expatriates, so possibly behaving a bit differently from the average Americans chez eux, plus I guess I was too young and inexperienced to really understand them.

  4. An iguana? Are you a Werner Herzog fan?

  5. Kuhulcan says:

    All words, no joy!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: