his blog entry is my writing out and commenting on Eric Hoffer’s content from Page 13 to through Page 18 of his book, Working and Thinking on the Waterfront, June 1958—May 1959. Here it is:
Hoffer (H after this): “
June 22
Nine and three-quarter hours on the Hawaiian Wholesaler in Encinal. Steady grind but the loads moved slowly. A good bunch. I felt better at 6 P.M. than I did in the morning.
I spoke with a tall Montenegrin whom I call Negus. He is Communist in his sympathies, bitter about this country, chock-full of grievances, but we get along. I asked him how many years ago Stephen Dushan lived. He answered correctly: about six hundred years ago. I felt I could discuss with this barely literate Montenegrin some of the things I had learned from Diehl’s Byzantium. I pointed out that the Bible was translated into Serbian, Bulgarian, and Russian before it was translated into German, French, and English. How come? Because in the West the Catholic Church was an independent power, an imperial power, and it did not want to see the formation of national churches which might be promoted by a translation of the Bible into common speech.”
My response: Notice how the Catholic Church in the West had a totalitarian grip on all nations under its auspices, in ecclesiastical as well as in political arena. Centralized power kept the people down and controlled. Very corrupt and not from Jesus at all, though it was done in His name.
H: “On the other hand, the Byzantine church, being under the thumb of the Emperor, was interested solely in the Christianization of the warlike barbarians, and this could be effected most readily by the formation of national churches.
Eventually, national churches came into being also in the West, and nations crystallized around these churches. This is a significant point. The compact churchly organization of Christianity promoted nation formation, while Islam, being without a church organization, could not supply a nucleus for national crystallization. This suggests that compact Communist parties rather than promote internationalism may in the long run foster nationalist separation.”
My response: Hoffer may have been right to declare that compact Communist organizations within a subjugated nations could serve as a local nucleus for the rise of nationalist fervor and aspiration for local people to have their own country, their own identity.
H: “He was listening attentively and shaking his head, but I had no way of telling whether he got the hang of what I said. When I finished he shook my hand and said: ‘It is always wonderful to talk with you.’ Of one thing I am sure. He will always remember, and brag about it, that the Bible was translated into Serbian long before it was translated in English—that Serbian literature is more ancient than English literature.
Lili and the boy have been on my mind all these days. I am following a policy of restraint: to see them only once a week. I must not acquire the habit of seeing them too often. I am going to die alone, and it is too late in life to start feeling lonely.:
My response: It seems that Hoffer the great soul knew he needed mostly to live alone to keep his independence and creativity alive: he loved Lili and little Eric, but he may not have been able to live with them each day.
H: “The kink in my back is gone. Yesterday’s work did it. The world looks clean and fresh after last night’s rain. I have a long list of chores to do, and I am just getting ready to clean my room. Before starting I read the last few pages of Byzantium. I cannot tell as yet what I got out of the book. It needs vigor to last a thousand years.
5 P.M. Spent a hectic day getting things done. Now I am caught up. After a meal of lettuce salad and pea soup I sit down to drink a glass of tea and read. I happened to read the latest issue of the nation. Suddenly I threw it away as a distasteful thing (whining, self-righteous, carping, petulant) and turned to a new travel book by Lord Kinross. This is a continuation of his book on the interior of Asia Minor.
7 P.M. The second Kinross book, as far as I read, is inferior to the first. Since I am in the mood to make it easy for myself I switched to another book—a delightful one. It is a book of letters written by an American woman who lived in Jerusalem 1953-54. It is a warm, sensitive, honest book. My first reaction is: What delightful people Americans are. I ought perhaps to say fine people.”
My response: Yes, Americans over all are delightful and fine.
H: “And saying this I reflect that I certainly am not an American (hinting that he is an illegal immigrant, Ed Says?). Under similar circumstances I would have been neither delightful nor fine. Here she is among total strangers and she does not carp or criticize (Unlike the carping, foreign intellectuals visiting here, Ed Says), or betray the least trace of bad temper. The American’s capacity for fraternization is a noble feature, a true foretaste of the brotherhood of man.”
My response: Here is another Hofferian paradox which somehow is a true statement about Americans: on one hand Americans masses are capable of fraternizing and brotherhood as part of an enormous working class and middle class, and on the other hand, America’s capitalistic, individualistic culture offers an authentic brotherhood, only reachable and true as individualists cooperate and compete but not viciously or to set up strict social pecking orders, not as hierarchical and rigid as elsewhere in the world. The book is Letters from Jerusalem by Mary Clawson. I shall probably sit up all night reading it.
H; I spent 5 hours (8-1) with Lili and the boy. Lili is wholly herself and a joy to be with. The boy is of absorbing interest to me. Though almost three years old he is yet to me a stranger—someone from another world come to live among us. He is tireless, fairly clumsy, and can be wonderfully affectionate.
In the afternoon the doorbell rang and a young man came up. He is working for the U.S. Information Office, and seemed intelligent and alert. We talked about the backward countries and how terribly handicapped an American is when dealing with them. It is hopeless to try to win the weak over to our side.”
My response: The weak are groupist generally, fanatical and sadomasochistic, either those richer and more powerful beat and oppress them, or are cowering and defeated, ready and deserving to be overthrow and deprived of power, position, wealth and perhaps their lives. The weak see the world as a power struggle, either one is abject and defeated, or ascendant and ready to take over.
H: “We have no ideology to impart, no faith to propagate, and no pride we can share with others. We have much to give in skills and tangible things. We can teach backward people how to work and how to be efficient. But no backward country could ever identify itself with America and be won over completely to our side. How strange it is! The whole world is imitating us, is becoming Americanized, yet the countries that become like us tend to resent us. And the reason is that we cannot win the intellectuals, the men of words, the self-appointed spokesmen who stand between us and the millions we try to help. All the rudeness and biting comes from the intellectuals, and we must have the dossier of the intellectual from way back at our finger tips—from his first appearance as a scribe with the invention of writing. An American is more truly of the masses than any intellectual anywhere, and he can benefit the masses more than any intellectual can do.”
My response: What a rich paragraph, true and representative of Offer; he is correct that we cannot reach the masses of the Third World the American Way, the land of individualism, moral egoism-altruism, the land of capitalism, fabulous opportunity and much personal liberty.
When Hoffer write than an American is more truly of the masses everywhere than any intellectual anywhere, and that he can benefit the masses everywhere more than any intellectual can do, this is the case but those masses must become, each of them or most of them, individuating anarchist supercitizens in their own constitutional republic, bless with riches, capitalism and liberty—this updated version of the American Way as the global culture, political and economic system, locally blended by the natives with their way of life as they see fit—this is the world that Hoffer anticipated coming about after his death, as he sensed it come about eventually sensed it decades ago.
H: “June 25
Nine hours on the Pope & Talbot Leader at Howard Street. Nothing much to do all day, but the last hour was hectic—sewer pipe. Since I didn’t sleep enough last night I feel tired.
I saw today a gentle-spoken longshoreman whom I have not seen for over a year. He works most o the time on the Oakland side of the bay. He is afflicted with an eruption around his nose. It has become much worse now. The flesh of his face is being eaten away, and his eyes are lusterless and lost amidst the expanse of decomposition. I told him how glad I was to see him. It is difficult to visualize the suffering of the man, particularly his thoughts as he rises in the morning.
July 1
Nine hours on the Flying Enterprise at Pier 34. A busy day but not unpleasant. The work though steady was not rushed.
But morning and evening are now cold and wet, but the middle of the day has a warm brilliance. The bay as seen through the huge open door in the back of the dock seemed a fairyland. I don’t think a landscape can come into a room through a window. It can come in only through a door.
The fact that I accomplish little when I take time off disqualifies me as a writer. I do have an original idea now and then. If I hang on with all of my might, I eventually put together a few thousand words. The most crucial words are never at my service. I have to search and recruit them anew each time.
July 2
Followed the Flying Enterprise to Oakland. An easy day in warm weather. A discussion with several Slavonians on the relative merits of America and the Old Country. What it comes to is that this is not a country for the old. After twenty years in America, these Slavonians are still homesick for their native village. They are excellent workers—skilled and conscientious. They look healthy, and young for their age. But the American tempo grates on them. They talk of the ease and the slowness back home, and how men over fifty no longer work but sit around talking and sipping coffee, letting their children take care of things, and remain hale until they are eighty or more. Actually, none of these Slavonians would be happy if they went back. A few tried and rushed back to America. I mentioned the fact. One of them said: ‘It may be so, but it will be our greed that will drag us back.:
My response: The way of life is faster in America, but wealth and opportunity can help one rise economically if one will hustle here.
H: “Early this morning on my way to work I felt a burning pain in the arms. It seemed to me for a moment that had I been without this pain I would have been wholly happy. In a moment like this I realize how lucky we are when nothing at all—good or bad—happens to us.”
My response: It may be that Hoffer’s philosophical worldview is revealed here: Hoffer the Stoic suggests we are happiest when nothing at all good or bad happens to us on a given day, and this seems evidence of the Stoic outlook brought to my attention in a 2024 article by Philosopher Pedro Gonzalez.
No comments:
Post a Comment