Published in Fellowship of
Catholic Scholars Quarterly, 25 (September 2002), 8-14.
James V. Schall, S. J.
Georgetown University, DC, 20057-1200
ABEYOND DESCRIPTION@:
ON THE AMOST WONDERFUL BOOK@
AAt seven in the morning we reached Hannibal, Missouri, where my boyhood
was spent. I had a glimpse of it
fifteen years ago, and another glimpse six years earlier, but both were so
brief that they hardly counted. The
only notion of the town that remained in my mind was the memory of it as I had
known it when I first quitted it twenty-nine years ago. That picture of it was still clear and vivid
to me as a photograph. I stepped ashore
(from the fast boat of the St. Louis and St. Paul Packet Company) with the
feeling of one who returns out of a dead-and-gone generation.... I saw the new houses B saw them plainly enough B but they did not affect the older
picture in my mind, for through their solid bricks and mortar I saw the
vanished houses, which had formerly stood there, with perfect distinction.@
B Samuel L. Clemens, Life on the
Mississippi.[1]
I.
If
someone has the privilege of attending grammar school and high school in the
Napa valley, he probably knows more about grapes and wine than anyone else of
his own age except perhaps those from Bordeaux in France or the Chianti region
in Italy. My friends, Jim and Kay
Kline, tell me that, within fifteen miles of downtown Healdsburg, where they
live, there are sixty-five wineries, a statistic, in their case, that derives,
I believe, from no book. Nor is it a fact
learned from their respective youths in Joplin, Missouri, or Alliance,
Nebraska, where other things besides grapes, like corn and wheat, were there to
be observed just by looking around within fifteen miles of downtown Joplin or
Alliance. And Mark Twain, in the
passage I cited in the beginning, reminds to Asee,@ at least in our memories, even
those things that have disappeared in the town in which we were born and
raised.
Yves
Simon remarked somewhere that if we are the son or daughter of a doctor, it is
more likely that we will know something of, say, biology or anatomy, than if we
grow up in a home of a Buick or Toyota dealer, wherein we probably would know
something more of workings of automobiles than how to turn on the ignition key. In other words, it is perfectly all right
to learn something from your family, from the place in which you live. In fact, many, if not most, of the important
things that one most needs to know about life are probably to be found within
his own household or within his own city limits or within fifteen miles of the
city=s center. We should not be entirely surprised that
someone, even our parents, learned something before we came along. One of the burdens of being young is that it
takes someone, as Plato calculates it in the seventh book of The Republic,
until he is about fifty to figure out most of the essential things he needs to
know, when, alas, he is too old to appreciate it if he did not get started
correctly. Not a day passes in which we
did not learn something we might have learned.
There is nothing tragic about this, unless we think we are gods,
somehow.
Aristotle
has something even more fundamental to say on this point of the need of a
proper upbringing before we can really understand what we are capable of knowing. We need to be brought up in Afine habits, if we are to be
adequate students of what is fine and just, and of political questions
generally,@ Aristotle tells us.
For
the origin we begin from is the belief that something is true, and if this is
apparent enough to us, we will not, at this stage, need the reason why it is
true in addition; and if we have this good upbringing, we have the origins to
begin from, or can easily acquire them.
Someone who neither has them nor can acquire them should listen to
Hesiod: AHe who understands everything himself is best of all; he is noble also
who listens to one who has spoken well; but he who neither understands it
himself nor takes to heart what he hears from another is a useless man@ (1095b4-12).
So, we do not
want to be useless men. We do not want
to be those who have not understood the simple fact that Asomething is true,@ which he should learn at
home. Someone who cannot figure such a
principle out or learn it from another, simply cannot begin to understand what
his life is about. Aristotle suggests
that we do not need to know everything from the beginning. But we do need to accept the premise that Asomething is true@ from which all valid things
flow. This original principle, again,
is that Asomething is true.@ Much
of modern thought and much of modern academic life are built on a denial of
this position. There usually follows
from this denial that Asomething is true@ an effort to extricate the very idea of
truth from students who have learned it, as Aristotle says, by their
upbringing.
It
was Bernard Shaw, I believe, who once quipped that Aadolescence is such a wonderful
time, it is too bad that we have to waste it on the youth.@
But if we do not waste any time at all in our lives, especially when we
are young, we probably have never really been youths of the human species. The Little Prince, in a book I hope you have
already read, affirms that it is only the time that we Awaste@ with our friends that
matters. Getting to know one another is
not a question of science; it has a lot to do with just being together with
nothing Ato do.@ If we are always Abusy,@ always preparing for something
else, we will never be able to attend to the important things, to which
someone, besides Plato, should tell us to attend. On second thought, perhaps Plato is sufficient to tell us these
things. Much of what is called
education is the realization that Plato has already told us most of what we
need to know.
II.
On
October 25, 1944, in England, J. R. R. Tolkien wrote a letter to his son
Christopher. In it, Tolkien in turn
cited a letter that he had himself received from a young man by the name of
John Barrow, who at the time was twelve years old and attended AWest town School, West town, Pa.@
Tolkien was then in the process of writing his famous Ring trilogy, of
which I am sure you all are aware, and, if not, you should be.
This
is the letter: ADear Mr. Tolkien, I have just
finished reading your book, The Hobbit, for the 11th time and
I want to tell you what I think of it.
I think it is the most wonderful book I have ever read. It is beyond description.... Gee Whiz, I=m surprised that it=s not more popular.... If you have written any other books, would
you please send me their names.@[2]
Notice that the title of this address B Abeyond description@ and the Amost wonderful book@ B stem from this very letter. In a footnote, Tolkien remarks that he was
quite surprised to learn that American boys really used the expression, AGee Whiz!@
I must doubt, however, that it is still much used among you. We need not add that, in retrospect, young
Mr. Barrow did not have to worry about the future popularity of Tolkien, whose
tales have become the most widely read books in the 20th century and
probably, so far, in the 21st Century.
Over
the years, I have had two students in my classes at Georgetown who have told me
that they read the whole of the Lord of the Ring trilogy ever year since they
were ten or eleven years old. They
would agree with the young man from West town, Pa., that this book B I will here assume The Hobbit and the
Ring trilogy are one B is Athe most wonderful book.@
It is no mean thing, I think, to encounter such a book when one is under
twelve, even if he does not fully know what it is all about. The book=s very charm is enough to alert us
to something of fundamental significance.
I do not think that I read these books until I was in my sixties, in my
dotage. I am just in the process of
rereading them in lieu of seeing the movies on them. I fear that the movie will deprive me of the actual book that
Tolkien wrote One of my ex-students
advised me against the movie. He did
not think it retains the sense of joy that suffuses and underlies the
book. I suspect he is right. Tolkien himself, however, admitted to his
son that he was a bit vain to receive such a letter from the young man in
Pennsylvania telling him it was Aa most wonderful book.@
Something powerful had happened to this boy because he read Tolkien=s book. AWhat exactly is it that happened to him?@ we might ask. ACan it happen to us?@
How do we find something that is Abeyond description,@ and yet still try to describe it?
One
of the most famous books of antiquity is Plutarch=s Parallel Lives of the Noble
Greeks and Romans. This book is the
source of several of Shakespeare=s plays and indeed a treasure for all
subsequent generations since it was first written in the early part of the
second century A. D. (45-120 A. D.).
Probably no book gives us more graphic examples of how we ought or ought
not to live than Plutarch does. In his ALife of Cato the Younger@ (95-45 B.C.), for instance, we
read that
Cato=s natural stubbornness and
slowness to be persuaded may also have made it more difficult to him to be
taught. For to learn is to submit to have
something done to one; and persuasion comes soonest to those who have least
strength to resist it. Hence young men
are sooner persuaded than those that are more in years.... In fine, where there is least previous doubt
and difficulty, the new impression is more easily accepted. Yet Cato, they say, was very obedient to his
preceptor, and would do whatever he was commanded; but he would also ask the
reason, and inquire the cause of everything.
And, indeed, his teacher was a very well-bred man, more ready to
instruct than to beat his scholars. His
name was Sarpedon.[3]
Though we
doubt whether any of them bear the first name ASarpedon,@ we certainly do presume that the
instructors here at Trinity are distinctly Awell-bred@ and Amore ready to instruct than to
beat@ young scholars! We also hope that these same young scholars
themselves, though manifesting considerable stubbornness in being persuaded,
have shown themselves ready to Ainquire the cause of everything.@
We shall see shortly that the young Socrates revealed this very quality
of wondering about the cause of everything.
III.
Linus
and a very cute little girl by the name of Lydia are seen walking back from the
ice cream shop. Lydia is in front of
Linus and over her shoulder politely tells him, AThank you for the Chocolate
Sunday, Linus.@ This intriguing response naturally encourages a smitten
Linus, who responds perkily, AYou=re welcome.... Maybe we can do it again sometime.@
But Lydia suddenly turns on poor Linus, now completely deflated, to tell
him, AI don=t think so.... I don=t find you very interesting.@
In
the next scene, a forlorn Linus is seen in the yard sitting against a tree
understandably depressed that charming Lydia finds him dull. But soon we see Lydia comfortably seated in
a big couch in her home. She is on the
telephone. We hear her say, AHi, Linus.... This is Lydia.@
Linus, still crushed, replies, AIf you don=t find me very interesting, why
did you call me?@ Finally, we see Lydia, before
her TV set, still on the phone to Linus, explaining to him, AThere=s nothing on TV.@[4]
Given a choice of nothing or Linus, even Lydia chooses Linus. This is
what I will call Athe Lydia academic principle.@ When
it comes to things that really count, Athere is nothing on TV.@
Almost anything, even poor Linus, is better than the nothing on TV. Always first go the Athe most wonderful book that is
beyond description,@ however much occasionally we might learn or mis-learn something from
TV. Always seek to Afind the cause of everything@ before you find there is Anothing on TV.@
Nothing, strictly speaking, will teach one precisely nothing.
IV.
Earlier,
in citing the young man in Water town, Pa., on his reading Tolkien, I remarked,
Awhat is it that happened to him?@
ACan it happen to us?@ In
Psalm 119, we read, AI have no love for half-hearted men: my love is for your law@ (113-14). I have long been struck by that phrase, Ahalf-hearted men.@
Allan Bloom, in his Closing of the American Mind, has spoken of
college students with Aflat souls.@ That is a devastating
phrase. AHalf-hearted men with flat souls@
B what could be worse? Would
believing that what is false to be true be worse? Plato said that truth is to know Aof what is that it is, and
of what is not, that it is not.@
Error is to affirm of what is that it is not. Thus, at first sight, we seem to be worse
off if we have a head full of errors than if we are Ahalf-hearted@ or have Aflat souls.@
Yet,
it seems, in a paradoxical way, that it might well be worse not to care about knowing
anything important than to have a mind full of lively errors that we think are
true. One of the seven capital sins was
called Asloth.@ This sin did not mean
laziness. It rather indicated never
trying to face what we are in our existence, never asking ourselves any
objective question about our purpose in reality. We consistently avoid ever
having to live according to what we ought to be, on the basis of what we are
and our purpose. In this sense, it is
quite possible to be enthusiastic about many things and still be Ahalf-hearted men@ when it comes to the higher
things. Indeed, pleasure and business,
even education, have long been seen to be a kind of escapism, an escapism from
our selves lest, as Socrates would say, we examine our lives..
In
his last day in jail, Socrates spends his time discussing with young men, the
potential philosophers, the reasons why he does not escape or show signs of
unsettlement about his dire condition.
At one point he talks to Cebes about his own youth. AWhen I was young,@ he tells Cebes, AI had an extreme passion for that
branch of learning which is called natural science; I thought it would be
marvelous to know the causes for which each thing comes and ceases and
continues to be@ (97a). Here we have this same effort to know the causes of things. But Socrates admits that he never really
could solve these sorts of questions.
The ordinary answers given for them, about earth, air, fire, and water,
did not satisfy him. Finally, however,
in his perplexity, he tells us that AI once heard someone reading from a book (as
he said) of Anaxagoras, and asserting that it is Mind that produces order and
is the cause of everything@ (96e).
This explanation, Socrates adds, Apleased me.@
We have here no Aflat soul,@ no Ahalf-hearted man,@ but one that was passionately interested in
finding the truth of things he could not understand.
V.
Henry
Adams entered Harvard College in 1854.
Henry was the grandson of John Quincy Adams, the sixth president of the
United States, and the great-grandson of John Adams, the second president of
the United States. The family on both
sides had gone to Harvard before him.
At the time, about a hundred students in Adams= class at Harvard, one of whom was
the son of a Colonel in the Second United States Calvary by the name of Robert
E. Lee. The nick-name of Lee=s son was ARoony.@
Though at first Adams thought the handsome young Lee to be a leader, but
by the end of the four college years, he changed his mind. AHe was simple beyond analysis; so simple that
even the simple New England student could not realize him. No one knew enough to know how ignorant he
was; how childlike, how helpless before the relative complexity of school.@[5]
But
Adams was even harder on Harvard in those days and he was witty. AFour years of Harvard College, if
successful, resulted in an autobiographical blank,@ Henry Adams remarked,
a
mind on which only a water-mark had been stamped. The stamp ... was a good
one. The chief wonder of education is
that it does not ruin everybody concerned in it, teachers and taught. Sometimes, in after life, Adams debated
whether in fact it had not ruined him and most of his companions, but,
disappointment apart, Harvard College was probably less hurtful than any other
university then in existence. It taught
little, and that little ill, but it left the mind open, free from bias,
ignorant of facts, but docile.[6]
Surely, we do
not want our education to ruin us. We
prefer to be taught Alittle@ than to be taught falsehoods.
And our minds should not be so open or free of bias that we stand for
nothing and recognize no distinction in things. We do want to be Adocile.@
In
Latin, this word Adocile@ is docilitas. It means
the virtue of being able to be taught.
The very name of this striking virtue implies that we must at some point
choose to be taught, Thus, we can refuse to know. Only the proud cannot and will not be taught. Pride means, quite literally, that we are
closed to everything but ourselves. We
allow ourselves to learn nothing because we think we already know everything,
or perhaps better, only what we know is worth knowing.. This is the worst of human conditions. If sloth is the capital sin that refuses to
examine what is our purpose in this world, pride is that capital sin at the
heart of all other sin and disorder of soul.
It wants not to discover what is worth knowing, but positively to decide
whether anything is worth knowing, even when it is worth knowing.
Samuel
L. Clemens tells of reaching his old home town of Hannibal, Missouri, on the
packet boat of the St. Louis and St. Paul Lines, at seven in the morning. It was a Sunday. He walked through the town.
He felt like Aa boy again.@ In his memory, all things were
again fresh. Clemens encountered an old
gentleman who had been in Hannibal for twenty-eight years, that is, he arrived
the year after Clemens left. He told
the old man his name was Smith. He
inquired of his old school friends. Of
the first one, the old gentleman replied, Ahe graduated with honor in an
Eastern college, wandered off into the world somewhere, succeeded at nothing,
passed out of knowledge and memory years ago, and is supposed to have gone to
the dogs.@
Of
the brightest lad in the village, the man recalled, Ahe, too, was graduated with
honors, from an Eastern college; but life whipped him in every battle, straight
along, and he died in one of the Territories, years ago, a defeated man.@
Cautiously, Clemens inquired of the girls, especially of his early
sweetheart. AShe is all right,@ the man reflected, Abeen married three times, buried
two husbands, divorced from the third, and I hear she is getting ready to marry
an old fellow in Colorado somewhere.
She=s got children scattered around here and there, most everywhere.@
This
was clearly not too promising a beginning.
Another friend had been killed in the Civil War. Finally, he mentioned another boy. And this boy presented one of the most
curious enigmas of our nature. This is
the man=s observation of what happened to this young man: AThere wasn=t a human being in this town but
knew that that boy was a perfect chucklehead; perfect dummy; just a stupid ass,
as you may say. Everybody knew it, and
everybody said it. Well, if that very
boy isn=t the first lawyer in the State of Missouri today, I=m a Democrat.@
This information startled Clemens and he wanted to know of the old man
how to account for it. AAccount for it? There ain>t any accounting for it, except
that if you send a damned fool to St. Louis, and you don=t tell them he=s a damned fool, they=ll never find out. There=s one thing sure -- if I had a
damned fool I should know what to do with him: ship him to St. Louis -- it=s the noblest market in the world
for that kind of property.@
Finally,
Clemens slyly got around to asking the old man about himself, if he knew
anything about what happened to one Samuel Clemens? AOh, he succeeded well enough,@ the man told him, Aanother case of a damned
fool. If they=d sent him to St. Louis, he=d have succeeded sooner.@
To this amusing observation, Clemens concludes, AIt was with much satisfaction that
I recognized the wisdom of having told this candid gentleman in the beginning,
that my name was Smith.@[7]
One
would be hard pressed to find out how many valuable lessons about life and
docility and humility and humor, about not being Adamned fools@ or perfect Achuckleheads,@ are to be found in this short
passage from Life on the Mississippi.
No doubt the citizens of St. Louis, in the meantime, have come to find
out that their greatest natural resource was explained to Samuel L. Clemens,
alias Smith, by an old gentleman one Sunday morning in Hannibal, Missouri. If you send a smart young man to an Eastern
college, three things may happen to him, either he will go to the dogs to die
unknown in the Territories or he will be elected to the state legislature but
remain a Adamned fool,@ or he will come back home as Mark Twain, alias Smith, enjoying a
certain wisdom listening to candid gentlemen telling him he too should have
been sent to the market in St. Louis.
One
final story is worth recounting to you today.
I frequently recommend to students that they should haunt used book
stores. A student I had in class a
couple of years ago is now studying, law, I think, in San Diego. He wrote to me recently that he happened to
be in a used book store where purchased eight books. Among these used books purchased, one was a volume of Churchill=s History of England, one a
book on the Goths, one a biography of Dr. Johnson And one was entitled Mt.
St. Michel and Chartres by none other than Henry Adams, whom we have
already met at Harvard in 1858. I once
used this wonderful book of Henry Adams in a medieval political philosophy
class.
My
young friend in San Diego was delighted with the Adams book. He was especially surprised to discover what
Adams said of Thomas Aquinas. It is
with this reflection on Aquinas that I will conclude:
I
was particularly taken by his (Adam=s) comparison of Aquinas as a Norman to men
like Abelard and Bonaventure as Bretons.
The former always undertakes less than he can accomplish, but later
wishes he had done more, while the latter assumes more than he can do, and
later regrets it. It is difficult to
look at the Summa of Aquinas and say, AThis man undertook too little B he really ought to have been more thorough.@
Nevertheless, Thomas himself recognized the paucity of his own work in
comparison to the Divine Perfection.
This does not discourage me: I
find it rather comforting that the Divine Perfection is inexhaustible to the
finite human person. Boredom is
hellish.
Joseph Pieper
in his book on Aquinas says the same thing, that the Summa is an
unfinished book, that Aquinas in a vision at the end of his own life realized
that in comparison to God, all that he had written is but straw.
So,
what I want you to recall from these recollections from Linus, Henry Adams, my
young friend in San Diego, Samuel Clemens, Plutarch, Plato, Aristotle, and J.
R.R. Tolkien are the following propositions:
1)
that boredom is indeed hellish,
2)
that you can go to fine Eastern colleges and still return home a damned fool,
3)
that nothing is on TV,
4)
that the chief wonder of education is that it does not ruin everyone, teacher
and taught,
5)
that we do want to know the causes of things,
6)
that something at least is true,
7)
that within fifteen miles of the downtown center of Healdsburg, there are sixty
five wineries,
8)
that you may be fortunate to have a tutor named Sarpedon, who is more ready to
instruct than to beat his scholars,
9)
that you learn to waste time with your friends,
10)
that some charming Lydia or handsome Linus may find you Ainteresting,@
11)
that your souls may not be Aflat@ or your hearts Ahalf-hearted,@
12)
that you be not a perfect Achucklehead,@ either in Hannibal or St. Louis,
13)
that you manage, for starters, to avoid the capital sins of pride and sloth,
and
finally 14) that the you are blessed if, at least once in your life, even in
Water town, Pa. or in the Napa Valley, you discover Aa most wonderful book,@ one Abeyond description@ and are hence incited to write to
its author in London to see if he has written anything else.
[1]Samuel L. Clemens, Life on the
Mississippi (New York: Lancer, 1968), 456-57.
[2]The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien, ed. H. Carpenter (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1981), 98
[3]Plutarch, The Lives of the
Noble Grecians and Romans, trans.
J. Dryden, revised Arthur Hugh Clough (New York: Modern Library, n. d.),
918
[4]Charles Schulz, ACould You Be More Pacific? (New York: Topper Books, 1988).
[5]The Education of Henry Adams: An
Autobiography
(New York: Time, 1964), 62
[6]Ibid., 59.
[7]Samuel L. Clemens, Life on the
Mississippi (New York: Lancer Books, 1968), 459-62.