What a wonderful painting! How much attention to detail and how faithfully both rest and action are rendered. I think that in one of the letters addressed to his brother Theo, Vincent van Gogh pointed out that it is very tempting to draw a character at rest, but to suggest action is extremely difficult and the reward is even greater in case of success.
From my college years, a memorable episode was definitely the one that happened in an electrical engineering course, during the period when the tenured professor was replaced by a colleague of his. We experienced then, thanks to the new teacher's grace as a pedagogue and storyteller, the miracle of seeing two essential laws for an electrical network born before our eyes: Kirchhoff's laws. A scientific discovery was transformed into an amazing story, which can be told endlessly. The consequence of this miracle was that I was able to discover, a little later ( by my own efforts), that even statistics, despite the boring manner in which it was taught, could become human and even fascinating. It had its own story too. Just like in Guilliam van Nieulandt's painting: around the ruins - real or supposed - there is life. And life is contagious.
A charming anecdote! How can we find the life amid the ruins? And more importantly, how can we focus on the life, rather than dwelling on the ruins? I am really trying to adopt this attitude, though it can be difficult!
Starting from van Nieulandt's admirable painting, I remembered an important voice coming from the ruins of the former Roman Empire, that of Marcus Aurelius. The thoughts he humbly addressed to himself should constitute, for the most part, a guide to action and conduct for today's leaders. It doesn't happen like that, or it happens rarely...
On my desktop now appears a sunny autumn image, with slender, white trunks of Aspen trees. A species that spreads with the help of roots: new stems grow from the roots of the parent poplar. Over time, the older trunks die, but the root system persists for thousands of years... Yes, it is natural for us to choose life, the present. But let's not ignore the past.
have you read P. Fleming's excellent Dark Academia?
I'd frame the question slightly differently: given the very poor response to the financial crisis, climate change, AI and the Gaza genocide do we need the university?
Has the university just helped replicate and offer intellectual support to the dominant powers (Keynes once made this argument with respect to economic orthodoxy)? Instead of opposing the neoliberal university it seems faculty and departments just submitted.
I have Dark Academia dowloaded on a hard drive, but haven't read it yet. When I say we need the university, the statement comes with several asterisks. Beyond my own agenda of ensuring the transmission of culture and learning during a dark age, I am not sure what the purpose of the university should be – whether it should, or can, pursue social justice, or simply cultivate learning as a vocation in the Weberian sense. It seems clear that the University won't continue on its present model, but what form it will take I'm again unsure.
Yes, I suppose it will be interesting to see. But I don't think there are many with the devotion of the monks (D.H. Lawrence has a lovely passage on how they salvaged the tradition).
I guess my question is: which culture? Law, economics, business studies, science, finance etc. only have, I think, a tangential relation to any deep sense of culture. Not to romanticize the opposition but what is learning/culture without soul?
What a wonderful painting! How much attention to detail and how faithfully both rest and action are rendered. I think that in one of the letters addressed to his brother Theo, Vincent van Gogh pointed out that it is very tempting to draw a character at rest, but to suggest action is extremely difficult and the reward is even greater in case of success.
From my college years, a memorable episode was definitely the one that happened in an electrical engineering course, during the period when the tenured professor was replaced by a colleague of his. We experienced then, thanks to the new teacher's grace as a pedagogue and storyteller, the miracle of seeing two essential laws for an electrical network born before our eyes: Kirchhoff's laws. A scientific discovery was transformed into an amazing story, which can be told endlessly. The consequence of this miracle was that I was able to discover, a little later ( by my own efforts), that even statistics, despite the boring manner in which it was taught, could become human and even fascinating. It had its own story too. Just like in Guilliam van Nieulandt's painting: around the ruins - real or supposed - there is life. And life is contagious.
A charming anecdote! How can we find the life amid the ruins? And more importantly, how can we focus on the life, rather than dwelling on the ruins? I am really trying to adopt this attitude, though it can be difficult!
Starting from van Nieulandt's admirable painting, I remembered an important voice coming from the ruins of the former Roman Empire, that of Marcus Aurelius. The thoughts he humbly addressed to himself should constitute, for the most part, a guide to action and conduct for today's leaders. It doesn't happen like that, or it happens rarely...
On my desktop now appears a sunny autumn image, with slender, white trunks of Aspen trees. A species that spreads with the help of roots: new stems grow from the roots of the parent poplar. Over time, the older trunks die, but the root system persists for thousands of years... Yes, it is natural for us to choose life, the present. But let's not ignore the past.
Wessie,
have you read P. Fleming's excellent Dark Academia?
I'd frame the question slightly differently: given the very poor response to the financial crisis, climate change, AI and the Gaza genocide do we need the university?
Has the university just helped replicate and offer intellectual support to the dominant powers (Keynes once made this argument with respect to economic orthodoxy)? Instead of opposing the neoliberal university it seems faculty and departments just submitted.
I have Dark Academia dowloaded on a hard drive, but haven't read it yet. When I say we need the university, the statement comes with several asterisks. Beyond my own agenda of ensuring the transmission of culture and learning during a dark age, I am not sure what the purpose of the university should be – whether it should, or can, pursue social justice, or simply cultivate learning as a vocation in the Weberian sense. It seems clear that the University won't continue on its present model, but what form it will take I'm again unsure.
Yes, I suppose it will be interesting to see. But I don't think there are many with the devotion of the monks (D.H. Lawrence has a lovely passage on how they salvaged the tradition).
I guess my question is: which culture? Law, economics, business studies, science, finance etc. only have, I think, a tangential relation to any deep sense of culture. Not to romanticize the opposition but what is learning/culture without soul?