Complexity and social sciences

Another recent paper from Jack Birner.

WALKER PERCY WEDNESDAY – 33

For the thousandth time Dr. Gamow looked at his patient—who sat as usual, alert and pleasant—and felt a small spasm of irritation. It was this amiability, he decided, which got on his nerves. There was a slyness about it and an opacity which put one off. It had not always been so between them. For the first year the analyst had been charmed—never had he had a more responsive patient. Never had his own theories found a readier confirmation than in the free (they seemed to be free) associations and the copious dreams which this one spread out at his feet like so many trophies. The next year or so left him pleased still but baffled. This one was a little too good to be true. At last the suspicion awoke that he, the doctor, was being entertained, royally it is true and getting paid for the privilege besides, but entertained nevertheless. Trophies they were sure enough, these dazzling wares offered every day, trophies to put him off the scent while the patient got clean away. Sourer still was the second suspicion that even the patient’s dreams and recollections, which bore out the doctor’s theories, confirmed hypotheses right and left, were somehow or other a performance too, the most exquisite of courtesies, as if the apple had fallen to the ground to please Sir Isaac Newton. Charged accordingly, the patient of course made an equally charming confession, exhibited heroic sweats and contortions to overcome his bad habits, offered crabbed and meager dreams, and so made another trophy of his disgrace.

The last year of the analysis the doctor had grown positively disgruntled. This one was a Southern belle, he decided, a good dancing partner, light on his feet and giving away nothing. He did not know how not to give away nothing. For five years they had danced, the two of them, the strangest dance in history, each attuned to the other and awaiting his pleasure, and so off they went crabwise and nowhere at all.

The doctor didn’t like his patient much, to tell the truth. They were not good friends. Although they had spent a thousand hours together in the most intimate converse, they were no more than acquaintances. Less than acquaintances. A laborer digging in a ditch would know more about his partner in a week than the doctor had learned about this patient in a year. Yet outwardly they were friendly enough.

The engineer, on the other hand, had a high opinion of his analyst and especially liked hearing him speak. Though Dr. Gamow was a native of Jackson Heights, his speech was exotic. He had a dark front tooth, turned on its axis, and he puckered his lips and pronounced his r’s almost like w’s. The engineer liked to hear him say neu-wosis, drawing out the second syllable with a musical clinical Viennese sound. Unlike most Americans, who speak as if they were sipping gruel, he chose his words like bonbons, so that his patients, whose lives were a poor meager business, received the pleasantest sense of the richness and delectability of such everyday things as words. Unlike some analysts, he did not use big words or technical words; but the small ordinary words he did use were invested with a peculiar luster. “I think you are pretty unhappy after all,” he might say, pronouncing pr?tty as it is spelled. His patient would nod gratefully. Even unhappiness is not so bad when it can be uttered so well. And in truth it did seem to the engineer, who was quick to sniff out theories and such, that people would feel better if they could lay hold of ordinary words.

At five o’clock, the Southerner’s hour, the office smelled of the accumulated misery of the day, an ozone of malcontent which stung the eyes like a Lionel train.

Ricky Riccardi: Keeping the legend of Louis alive

This article about the life and work of Ricky Riccardi was from exactly a year ago. I don’t think the term “disciple” is appropriate — it’s more the keeper of the flame and musical scholar — and as fate would have there is no better person to do it. I’ll be seeing Ricky at the archives soon as well as visiting the Louis Armstrong House Museum. And if you haven’t read his What A Wonderful World: The Magic of Louis Armstrong’s Later Years I’d highly recommend you do.

When asked, What can the music and message of Louis Armstrong add to an individual’s life?, Ricky Riccardi answers: “One word: Joy. Louis Armstrong makes people feel good and who doesn’t want to feel good? That’s what attracted me to him when I was 15 and that’s what still keeps me going all these years later: Joy.”

Conversations on Philanthropy

The latest issue of Conversations on Philanthropy dedicated to The Legacy of Richard C. Cornuelle is now available, gratis as usual but they would welcome donations in support of this excellent journal.

Dr. John to pay Jazz Fest-ending tribute to Louis Armstrong

A clear case of misguided hyperbole. Come on — as much as I respect the good Dr. he ain’t in Pops’ league — nobody is!

Dr. John will help close out the New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival presented by Shell on Sunday with a tribute to a New Orleans legend just as renowned as he is: Louis Armstrong.

Link Wray

The unmistakeable early master of the power chord born on this date. This year also marks 10 years since he died.

See the sheer delight and appreciation that Jimmy Page displays:

WALKER PERCY WEDNESDAY – 32

Happy people were worse off in their happiness in museums than anywhere else, he had noticed sometime ago. In here the air was thick as mustard gas with ravenous particles which were stealing the substance from painting and viewer alike. Though the light was technically good, illuminating the paintings in an unexceptionable manner, it nevertheless gave the effect of descending in a dismal twilight from a vast upper region which roared like a conch shell. Here in the roaring twilight the engineer stationed himself and watched people watch the paintings. Sometime ago he had discovered that it is impossible to look at a painting simply so: man-looking-at-a-painting, voilà!—no, it is necessary to play a trick such as watching a man who is watching, standing on his shoulders, so to speak. There are several ways of getting around the ravenous particles.

. . .

Yet the young man, who was scientifically minded, held himself sufficiently detached to observe the behavior of other visitors. From his vantage point behind the pillar he noticed that the people who came in were both happy and afflicted. They were afflicted in their happiness. They were serene, but their serenity was a perilous thing to see. In they came, smiling, and out they went, their eyes glazed over. The paintings smoked and shriveled in their frames.

Williams on Wagner & Politics

New York Review of Books November 2, 2000.

My point here is not to reinstate the distinction between the work and the man, which I have already said is not a helpful device in Wagner’s case. The point is just that one cannot decide in advance, either positively or negatively, what facts about the man, his views, and their history may be relevant to responding to a given work.

Compare the quality of the writing and subtlety and depth of analysis here to the new breed of smug, shrill and self-righteous wannabe public intellectual hack whose stance is merely functional to professional aggrandizement, the innumerable outlets complicitous in their relentless quest for content and click-bait and most importantly knowing how easy it is to tap the vanity of the self-branded “intellectual”. On this, Richard Posner’s Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline might be worth taking a look at. Part of the blurb:

. . . commenting on topics outside their ken. The resulting scene—one of off-the-cuff pronouncements, erroneous predictions, and ignorant policy proposals—compares poorly with the performance of earlier public intellectuals, largely nonacademics whose erudition and breadth of knowledge were well suited to public discourse.