Say "Stoic"

Look at these portraits of our Founding Fathers.

George Washington:


John Adams:


Thomas Jefferson:


James Madison:


Alexander Hamilton:


Ben Franklin:


(Okay fine) Aaron Burr:


Now look back at John Adams.

Notice anything different/special about his portrait? These men knew they were making history while they were alive, and pretty early on got ready for history to look back at them. They knew what they were doing. They knew we'd know them, and they wanted us to look kindly not only at them but on their cause, and their view of what the American Revolution really meant. They kept records of what they did. They kept all correspondences (and were often writing to us just as much as they were writing to each other). They also posed often for portraits. John Adams stands out in this area, because he could never stand to hold the same pose for very long at all. Everyone else has the same stoic, noble, courageous look on their face, but Adams looks hilarious, not being able to sit still (with that absurd expression) for a very long time at all. What a funny guy.

I know. I'm a geek.

Chice

Review: American Sphinx

I've recently finished a biography of Thomas Jefferson called American Sphinx, by the excellent Joseph J. Ellis. If I had some sort of strange rating system, it would most definitely get a perfect score. It's accessible, interesting, and I couldn't recommend it more. Be a cool cat and buy this!
Chice

What A Coincidence

I've always regarded strange coincidences as just that: strange coincidences. There are those who see freak coincidences and see great and fantastic things. Sometimes religious. Sometimes supernatural. They can't explain why a god (or a something?) would make such a thing happen (the classic line that drives me nuts, "God works in mysterious ways"), but they do say something along the lines of "no coincidence could be that big".

Is it true? Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were both on the committee in the Continental Congress in '75/'76 that was given the responsibility of writing the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson wrote it alone (Despite what Adams later tried to claim), but both of these men were involved, and both of these men died on July 4, 1826-the 50th anniversary of the country's "birthday"! If there were ever a huge fucking coincidence in history, it would have to be this one. I ask you, can that be just a coincidence? Even I'm inclined to say no, and I have no patience for that argument. It's too bizarre! Too perfect!

Chice

Thomas Jefferson: BAMF

Did you know that Thomas Jefferson wrote 100% of his first (and I think second) inaugural address? This speech is also one of the finest ever given in our country's history. This is maybe my favorite political quote ever, and it's from this address:

If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it.

Can you imagine a modern politician writing large portions (or god-forbid the majority) of a major speech? An inaugural address, or a State of the Union? (Jefferson also wrote every State of the Union, except he discontinued the tradition established by Washington & Adams of speaking to congress at the beginning of every year, preferring instead to submit a written report to congress. Very Jefferson.)

Jefferson also of course wrote the original draft of (so most of) the Declaration of Independence. This excerpt is probably the most famous writing in American history:

We hold these truths to be self evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inherent and inalienable Rights; that among these are life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Thomas Jefferson. What a BAMF.

Chice

Candor & Courtesy

Thomas Jefferson always regarded candor and courtesy as incompatible. Aka, one can usually choose between being honest and being nice, but not both.

Do you agree with him?

Jefferson had a tendency his entire life to simplify things into black and white, when naturally they are almost never that simple. This is probably an example of that: candor and courtesy are of course compatible in some situations, and when they aren't we all naturally go with on or the other depending on the situation. This begs the question though, how often do you go for candor, and how often for courtesy? How often are you honest with someone when you could have been a bit more polite or told them what they wanted to hear? And how often do you think one thing and say another?

I think a great deal of it depends on where you grew up. I've found that Midwesterners, for example, choose courtesy over candor much more than East Coasters do . In general actually, it's been my experience that the more urban you are, the more blunt you are, and the more small town/country you are, the more courteous and polite you are.

Neither way is inherently better or worse than the other; it's naturally just a cultural thing. But do you think one is superior to the other (most of the time). I know I'm inclined to favor candor over courtesy in most situations, having grown up in the Midwest (where people are very mannered, polite, and modest). These tendencies drive me crazy, and I have the time of my life any time I travel East and hear people talk the way I think they're meant to. So not all of it is completely related to your upbringing either. (Unless my dislike of all the courtesy is a subconscious rejection of my roots, a desire to grow up and be different than my parents. I do want this, but I don't think that's it. Think what you will.) It's also very possible then that we're all just wired too for one way or another. But look at me doing what I criticized Jefferson for doing: simplifying everything into black and white. It's of course a mix of your upbringing and your biology.

It's still an interesting question though, isn't it? What do you choose more often, candor or courtesy (when they are indeed incompatible)? Why?

Chice

Come Back, "Almighty Physician"

Thomas Jefferson called the sun his "almighty physician". He said that pretty much no matter what was the matter, no matter what was bothering him, the sun would cheer him up and make things alright.

It's April, and it's still snowing here! I can't remember the last time it's been this crappy this late in the year. Everyone I know is pretty down, and I know I am. It really does go to show how powerful an impact the weather has on us, how at its mercy we all are.

Not really sure how I feel about that. It kinda sucks, because it means no matter what you do, in a lot of ways happiness is completely out of your control, but I guess that's always true to some degree, isn't it?

On the other hand, when the sun does finally come out, you'll also be much happier than you normally would have been. This brings up an interesting point I think. I have a friend who used to go to camp in the wilderness every single summer. Most people go to camp because they enjoy it in one way or another, but my friend did it for the exact opposite reason-it made him so miserable, that it made him appreciate the rest of the year so much more. This always made me really sad, and I still think it kind of is, but I do think there's something to the quality/quantity argument.

Still, the sun needs to come back. Now please? Sigh...

Chice

Originality

I've been thinking a lot lately about originality-true originality. How do you know when something you say or write is genuinely original? I used to think achieving genuine originality was a simple thing: just don't borrow from other works of art or scholarship and what you've done is original. That sounds so childish now. (I guess it makes sense that it was though, doesn't it?)

Reality is naturally much more complex than that. How does one really know that their work is original when there's SO MUCH art and scholarship out in the world already? When you have a thought, how do you know if someone else has had it already? How do you know if someone else has published their idea? After all, just because something is original to you doesn't mean it's original to the world.

It's also possible to copy someone else's work without knowing it (as opposed to copying it consciously or copying it without ever having known it existed). Paul McCartney dreamt the tune to "Yesterday" in 1963 (then called "Scrambled Eggs") but didn't record it for years, worrying he was stealing the tune from someone else. He hummed it to everyone he knew for years, and no one had heard it before so finally he recorded it. Wise choice.

George Harrison (unfortunately) also woke up one day with a tune in his head-the tune to "My Sweet Lord". George sadly didn't bother to hum to the tune to anyone he knew though and was eventually sued for ripping off the tune-he'd stolen it verbatim from "She's So Fine". Oops.

W.B. Yeats had a theory about originality that I've really come to embrace. He said that the only way to become a truly original artist was by mastering all the classics that preceded you, imitating them (to get to know them and yourself), and then and only then can you branch out from that and become an original artist. You can see this in Yeats's own career as he got more and more abstract and strange (but creative and original) the older he got.

Still, it's never possible to know for sure. It's also silly to worry too much about it. Thomas Jefferson was accused of plagiarism throughout his entire career, and had a standard response to such an accusation: "Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing", he said he drew his ideas from "the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in letters, printed essays or in the elementary books of public rights, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, etc." I dig that too.

Chice

The Little Things

Sometimes my favorite thing about the study of history is something small and funny, something that really makes the history come alive or something that makes me laugh. Like knowing that David Souter eats the SAME THING for lunch everyday: an apple (the entire thing, core and all) and yogurt, or knowing that Ruth Bater Ginsburg hates having her chambers right above Clarence Thomas because the cigar smoke from his office blows up through the vents.

It's even funnier though when reading about historical figures that have been dead for hundreds of years (and even more important because the need to humanize them is much greater). An example: not much is known about Thomas Jefferson's mannerisms. He was exceedingly shy and timid in public situations and was once compared to an awkward stranger at a party who would silently hover from group to group without ever saying anything (that guy!). Also, whenever Jefferson was alone (or in the close company of his slaves or friends) he was always singing or humming to himself! He loved it.

Doesn't that make a previously unreachable historical figure a little more human? I love things like that-the little things. When studying history, it's important to keep in mind that less is more: never study too much history too fast or without much attention to detail. What's the point of that? Rather, study a more specific period of history, the people from that time, and what they did. And when you do this, don't be afraid of tightening the lens as tight as you can. Don't be afraid to learn about the little things-they'll make everything more human (and you'll laugh).

Chice