is the word 'diary' better than the word 'blog'? probably not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly the Best. Joke. Ever.
I'm in the Hilton in College Station, TX, right now; it's Friday morning; I'm slightly hungover and so very happy that I don't have to be anywhere until noon. Last night I drank a bunch of wine and ate some great food with a number of smart and interesting philosopher-friends of mine, all of whom are in town for the yearly meeting of a small group I'm in, of philosophers who work on Emmanuel Levinas. This particular group of people all came to town a day early to participate in an event structured around one of Levinas' readings of the Talmud (a part of his work with which I haven't spent much time). The aim of the event was to listen to a Levinas scholar introduce the context and main themes of the essay by Levinas; then break all the attendees up into small groups led by readers of Levinas (this was my role) and, as a group, work through the text, to sort out some of its meaning together=--that suits the tradition of Talmudic reading, which is less about determining the one right answer and more about participating in a community of people who read and thereby renew/respond to the work of traditions. After the break-out groups, three other scholars gave short interpretations, and then there was a larger discussion.
It was a great event. Each aspect of it went really well. Plus there was tasty food everywhere. Everything about the event embodied the idea that knowledge is something that people encounter together rather than isolated from each other, and that teaching is meant to be dialogue rather than one-sided lecture. I was very glad to have been invited to participate. (And now I want to try to do something like it at Haverford some time!)
Anyway, what about the best joke ever, you ask! It's coming.
During the wider discussion that happened at the end of the event, the subject of men-looking-at-women came up, because the essay we were discussing was Levinas' reading of the creation myth, and of the two strands of commentary on it, the one that calls man and woman equal and the one that calls woman subordinate to man. One of the claims made by some but not all of the various Rabbis who contribute to the Talmud is that men should not walk behind women because doing so would make men feel evil passions. (This somehow, as you know, ends up becoming the woman's fault, which is a regrettable feature of patriarchy. This also ends up meaning that women are not allowed to have authority. They should not be the subject of a gaze at all, etc.) The discussion about this idea was ranging in a lot of different directions, until a friend of mine pointed out that it has become clear to her over time in various kinds of discussions that there really is, amongst women, a dismissal of the idea that gazing at women is wrong for men and bad for women, while there is, amongst men, the opposite idea that gazing at women (with lust) is a form of debasement for both the gazer and the one gazed at.
I thought (because I'm a woman), that's silly (and can't possibly be true)! But then, as more and more people said things, it became very clear that, even in that room, full of a mixture of philosophers and other academics and then also students of various ages, that all the men felt that it is indeed a form of debasement to look at a woman with lust. (Except the gay man who said that it has never occurred to him to look at a woman in that way.) I have never felt so scandalized in a room full of thinkers in my entire life! I could not disguise it on my face. At some point I said, "you know, as a room, we have just performed exactly what B--- said!" That's when C--- swooped in to (in my mind) save the day by pointing out that, at least in the Jewish tradition, there is nothing wrong with desire. There isn't even anything entirely wrong with simple lust, as long as you don't let it overtake the better part of you. Our desires (our lusts, even) for food and drink and pleasure and other people are part of our happiness. Turning it into debasement is regrettable (and, possibly, Christian).
Anyway, it was a very lively and interesting discussion, which included close attention to the idea that one of the reasons you can't walk behind a woman who is crossing a river is that she will have to lift up her garments to avoid getting them wet and then you might see things that should be hidden and then of course you will have your animal lust provoked and then of course you will be angry that this has happened such that you'll either blame the woman or attack her. That is also why, if you have to choose walking behind a woman or walking behind a lion, you should choose walking behind a lion, even though the lion might attack you. (These are cases mentioned in the section of the Talmud we were reading.) And so on.
And now the joke. As we stood up to leave the room after the session was over, and most people had left, but a number of philosophers remained, gathering up their things, I said, "if anyone wants to look at my ass as I walk out of the room, it is perfectly fine with me."
10:03 a.m. - February 04, 2011
Laura - 2011-02-06 04:30:39
I love that story.
-------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
