Thanks very much for your messages. I'm actually, for the most part of my
working time, not as pessimistic about scholarship and research as I
sounded--there're certainly diversity and struggles within oneself--and ups
and downs across time! And yes, the danger of missionary zeal is something
we're all too familiar with. People of the 1930s or 60s have socialism to
turn to, if they are frustrated by the status quo. I suppose few would
want to turn to any "isms" today. People in Hong Kong have a strong phobia
of any "isms" though we fall prey to cut-throat commercialism in unspoken
ways. Thanks to all who wrote me--I'm well and alive and yes will work
hard towards what appear to be achievable goals for the time being. Happy
new year.
Angel
At 12:19 PM 1/2/99 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Hi Angel-- The good news is that you are still allowed to be a subscriber/
>participant in xmca. I was not sure this would be possible when you left
>Toronto.
>
>You write:
> If life has to be swollowed like
>this, why bother about scholarship and intellectual matters? Why bother
>about publishing research articles or books? Yet, of course, I believe we
>still have to persist in doing whatever little things we think we could do
>to help make things a little bit different, a bit more human (or perpas it
>is precisely human to reproduce social injustice and inequalities?). It's
>not possible to discuss these matters with your colleagues--who would want
>to enter into such discussions about our social structures which by all
>standards can only induce pessimisms?eagues.......
>
>There are many reasons to bother with scholarship and intellectual
>matters. They include the great pleasures that come from discovering what
>someone brilliant (a Benjamin, a Quechua adult, a.....) has discovered
before--
>a pattern, an insight into ourselves/others world. There is the hope of
>making things less painful for others in addition to ourselves, which
reflects
>back on us in a variety of ways. Personally, I don't see these moments of
>re-searching as disjunctive. In-sight/for-sight/ and of course hind/sight
>come through the interplay of thinking/thoerizing-theory/practice/inquiry/
>experiencing.
>
>My guess is that a lot of people on xmca would take your description of Hong
>Kong to apply to their locales as well. I am relatively certain, having
listened
>to the head of the San Diego Teachers' union, that they would see themselves
>reflected in your portrait. There is a big irony there. Our local teachers
>are being "guided" by experts from Pittsburgh and New York, who believe they
>have the solution to our local dilemmas.
>
>If you have not read it yet, I recommend Eugene's article in the most recent
>Human Development and the discussions around it. I am particularly reminded
>of a footnote in which Eugene separates himself from a "missionary" certainty
>in the rightness of his values, while acknowledging the struggle it requires
>not to impose them.
>
>The Vai have an expression (had an expression-- are any of my former friends
>left alive after years of carnage?) that I carry around with me, but look at
>too seldom: Never run around after someone for their own good. It doesn't
>seem to stop me, but sometimes it slows me down.
>
>I am glad you can still, from time to time, find the resources for the luxury
>of our angelic/demonic conversations.
>mike
>
>