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.
