Middle Ages and beyond

Gender, race, and the self in mental health and crime.

2006-09-11T17:14:00.000-07:00

This article refers to a qualitative analysis implemented – using a z-score hypothesis testing model to analyze self-salience- in order to test a research hypothesis which established that there are sharp and uniform differences in mental problems and crime according to gender and race. In this analysis we should take notice of the sampling used. The number of those respondents, males and females in adolescence (the point at which these pattern of behavior arise), who described themselves as white was eleven and a half times larger than the sample population of African-Americans, which only totaled 106 individuals. Thus, the authors conceded that “this research should be considered exploratory” (pp. 168) on the basis of the small sample of African-Americans, although they defended the outcome of the study, and against selection bias, pointing to the fact that their results “replicate those found in previous research with larger samples” (pp. 169).

The results record that with regard to internalizing (e.g., symptoms of depression and anxiety) and externalizing (e.g., theft, assault, and substance abuse) problems, there are differences in the patterns of behavior according to gender and race. Moreover, differences are statistically significant, in all cases, at which point the null hypothesis should be rejected.

Also, it was observed that there is a strong correlation between self-importance and mental health problems, although further studies would be necessary in order to demonstrate causation.

This work represents an innovative approach about “the social determinants of mental health problems and criminal behavior” (pp. 179), contributing, thus, to theoretical frameworks in the area of social problems, health, and criminology.

References:

Rosenfield, S., Phillips, J. & White, H. (2006). Gender, race, and the self in mental health and crime. Social Problems, 53 (2). Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 161-185.

Aldus: the humanist and the printer

2006-08-10T09:08:00.000-07:00

Gutenberg has been overplayed. Do not get me wrong, to Johann Gutenberg corresponds the honor of inventing the process by which a book could be printed, using a movable type. However, to say that he should be credited- as many have said- with the creation of a demand for books and their reading is too far fetched: he responded to an ever increasing demand that existed in that period.

Certainly, by 1455, Gutenberg perfected the process of manufacturing books. From the molds used to make the letters to a sliding box that would guarantee that each letter had exactly the same height as the rest, while accommodating the varying widths of different letters. His method of printing was imaginative and stylish, and it continued as the reigning technology for centuries to come. These accomplishments in themselves make of Gutenberg a well deserved representative of the focus of this Blog: ÂMiddle Ages and beyondÂ. Unfortunately, consumed by debts, he died around 1468.

On the other hand, and some twenty years later, Aldus Manutius established a printing business. With monies gifted to him by the princess of Carpi, and shares of the new business venture that he sold to Andrea de Torresani, Aldus started the business. AldusÂ proposal seemed perfectly fit for Torresani who had bought out previously another printer, Nicolas Jenson, and his ÂromanÂ font. Back in those days, the financial success of the printing ventures depended also in those "intangible" assets, such as fonts, typefaces, and the like, and not only in machines, buildings, and so forth. Torresani, a savvy investor, saw the opportunity of using his newly acquired font in Manutius' enterprise.

Considered a humanist scholar by the standards of the times, Aldus decided to publish, firstly, a Greek lexicon, or what we may term today as a Greek-Latin dictionary and phrase book. He was a Greek enthusiast, even designating Greek as the official language of his business:everybody was expected to comply with that requirement, and digressions in other language were not allowed.

Aldus published classics, in Latin and Greek, expanding print runs from 250 to 1,000 which helped him to amortize his costs.

Everything coming out from the Aldine presses was sold out. "Oposculum de Herone et Leandro", "Hypnerotomachia Poliphili" ( a quite stunning and erotic book written by a Dominican monk), Erasmus' "Adagia" ("Collectana Adagiorium", one-liners with genesis and commetary), and works of Petrarch, Virgil, Dante, Horace, Ovid, Thucydides, Plato, and Aristotle, among others, they all were bestsellers in their own right!

With Aldus books became thinner, consequently accessible: he commissioned the creation of new typefaces for books printed in Latin, narrower than the "roman" type and a little more skewed in order to resemble the cursive style. The lowercase letters were of the same height, and they were combined with the small capitals employed in previous Latin editions. These improvements implied that more words were able to fit on one page, which resulted in a book half the size of anything known before and not much thicker. This process is what is known as the Aldine octavos, that is increasing the number of times a "folio" was folded, which it was translated into printed pages, that is the more it was folded , it meant more printed pages, thus the greater the number, the smaller the size of the book.

Aldus' octavos may be compared to Gates' Microsoft: Aldus dramatically changed the way people got involved in the revolutionary transformation of Western culture.

Manutius initiated in that little printing business in Venice the sixteenth century's super- information highway: more information was available to a single individual than it has been available in the past to many institutions.

Those were times were if you had something to say you could just publish it. More books represented more knowledge, and whether your point of view was radical, controversial, revolutionary, sacrilegious, or just contrary to accepted beliefs, so be it.

Aldus should be well remembered. Today, where another revolution in, and through, the internet took place, the blogosphere, where we appreciate the power - and struggle thereof- of the ideas taking place in a new marketplace, a global marketplace, we should reckon Manutius as the forefather of that struggle..

Reference

Boorstin, D. (1983). The Discoverers. New York: Random House.

Durant, W. & A. (1957). The story of civilization. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Grendler, P. (1984). Aldus Manutius: Humanist, teacher, and printer. Providence: John Carter Brown Library.

Hale, J. (1994). The civilization of Europe in the Renaissance. New York: Atheneum.

Lowry, M. (1979). The world of Aldus Manutius: Business and sholarship in Renaissance Venice. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Winship, G. P. (1940). Printing in the Fifteenth Century. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

A Weberian perspective for the research in historical sociology

2006-06-26T16:57:00.000-07:00

Introduction:

In this paper, I will review the literature regarding the principal sociological perspectives used in the research on comparative-historical sociology, as well as presenting a survey on the different readings of Weber’s analysis in American sociology that may allow for the creation of explicit empirical models that had better illustrate the dynamic of change in different societies.

There are different theories that attempt to elucidate the diverse aspects of social life (Giddens, A. & Turner, J., 1987), however, a detailed analysis of all those goes beyond the scope of this paper.

Competing Approaches in Comparative-Historical Sociology:

Historical sociology studies the interdependency of historical data with sociological theory in order to explain the dynamic of change in different societies. It applies the historical records and actual evidence from contemporary societies in order to test different hypotheses that, in principle, can be used to predict the course of social advancement. Moreover, the use of comparative methods allows us to ascertain the multicausality of social phenomena through analyzing cases that are similar in many respects while differing in only one or a few instances. The comparative method is one of the tools used for comparing large-scale occurrences of social phenomena (Lachmann, R., 1991; Calhoun, C., 1998).

There are three sociological perspectives that attempt to shed light in a whole range of issues in comparative-historical studies: world system theory, interpretative historical approach, and causal analytic perspective (Kalberg, S., 1994). However, these three theoretical worldviews fail to articulate explicit empirical models leaving some dilemmas that can be elucidated using strategic procedures of research that are inspired by the corpus of Weber’s writings.

World System Theory:

This theory opposes “the way the ways in which social scientific inquiry” has been systematically structured since the middle of the nineteenth century (Wallerstein, I., 1987, pg. 309). Succinctly, this theoretical model establishes that the interconnection in the economic and political arenas tie the world’s countries together (Henslin, J. M., 2005).

The basis for this argument is that the economic, the political and the sociocultural factors are interdependent one another in such a fashion that not valuable examination can isolate them, that is, considering only one factor as variable while holding the others as constant. As a result, this methodology considers that “there is a single set of rules or a single set of constraints within which these various structures operate” (Wallerstein, pg. 313).

This perspective instead of examining historical processes “through the lens of a particular conceptual scheme”, rather it outlines the complexities of a few number of differentiated cases in order to carry out thorough comparisons with the aim of isolate particularity; certainly this “all theory-centered strategy to establish causality” has many critics (Kalberg, pg. 5).

The proponents of this social theory stress structural forces (e.g., class relations, the state, and so forth) at the expense of cultural forces (e.g., family, religion, and the like) to establish multicausality (Kalberg).

They start with abstract conceptualizations and “move in the direction of the concrete” determining, in the process, the “hyper-complex” particularity of historical systems “that accounts plausibly for how they followed a particular concrete historical path” (Wallerstein, pg. 324).

Interpretative Historical Approach:

This approach to the study of comparative-historical sociology stands in opposition to an all-theory-centered strategy to ascertain causality in addition it focuses in the particular case itself, in all its complexity, historical development, and social context (Kalberg).

The adherents to this viewpoint create general causal propositions; they evaluate each “irreducible” historic event in relation to a previously outlined conceptualization, or “theme”, as a theoretical framework, seeking “to compare and contrast cases one with another”.

Thus, causality is conveyed “through a detailed chronicle of events”, and it limits “causal explorations to statements about the case”. In addition, this perspective acknowledges “a full panorama of causal forces” like the Weberian approach (Kalberg, pp. 5-7).

Causal Analytical Perspective:

The basis of this perspective is the detailed analysis of empirical cases, and it stands in opposition to the world system theory.

Also, it differs from the interpretative historical approach because the construction of causal analytic propositions is conducted by “explicit research designs that demarcate sources of variation”, which allows, “to produce valid inferences despite small number of cases” by which causal hypothesis are tested, as well as “generating new explanatory generalizations” (Kalberg, pp. 7-9).

This methodological perspective, along with the world systems and interpretative historical, are the most dominant approaches in the research in comparative-historical sociology. For instance, comparisons and contrasts between successful and failed social revolutions look for the isolation of features commons to the successful cases (Kalberg).

Weber’s Sociology in America:

Weber’s Sociological Foundation:

The foundational components of Weber’s sociology are methodological individualism, four specific types of social action, Vesterhen, and pluralism of motives (Kalberg; Gerth & Mills, C. W., 1946; Giddens, A., 1976; Weber, M., 1921[1976]).

Weber emphasized the individual actors and the potentiality that they have to influence their surroundings. Individuals are not seen as a product of social forces of sort, and the subjective motivations of individuals constitute a “meaning-complex” (Kalberg).

Sociology for Weber, therefore, was defined as the interpretative understanding of social action, or Vesterhen (Kalberg). This German term is characterized as “to have insight into someone’s situation” (Henslin).

The fundamental building block in the analysis of any society is the societal actions performed by individuals, which include a social and subjective meaning. This societal actions involves one of four types of consequential actions (which might be positive or negative), and they are means-end rational, value-rational, affectual, and traditional (Kalberg).

The motives are the causes of action; they orient action through subjective meaning; and Weber highlighted the plurality of motives (Kalberg).

Weber’s approach is considered, then, valid because “it provides a explicit and specific ways of thinking of linking agency and social structure”, and, in doing so, he explained the different ways in which subjective meanings orient actions, demonstrating the relevance of the intensity of those actions, as well as “the contextual constrains and opportunities that surround regular action” (Kalberg).

Weberian Understudies in America:

As posited by Swedberg, R. (2003), there are three typical, or “ideal-typical”, theoretical approaches to research in comparative-historical sociology based on Weber’s writings: traditional or conventional, rational choice, and interest viewpoint.

Each one of them incorporates Weber’s Vesterhen, the plurality of motives, or causes of action, and his view of methodological individualism; but they are distinctive on how they apply these premises.

The traditional viewpoint highlights that values and norms are the principal causes of action. This theoretical approach downplays methodological individualism as enunciated by Weber, although it incorporates the notion of Vesterhen. The adherents of this methodology see history as “a progression in term of rationality” (Swedberg).

Rationalization implies efficiency, calculation, steadiness, logic, and systematization, with the goal of obtaining better profits (Weber; Henslin). Moreover, for Weber, capitalism was “the embodiment of rational impersonality” (Gerth & Mills, pg. 73).

Rationalization in society as a broad social phenomenon is better seen in the context of social structures. Social institutions are relatively unchangeable structures of social patterns, role, and relationships that people establish for satisfying basic social needs (Henslin; Fichter, J., 1961).; and they adopt sanctions and unified means with the objective of increasing efficiency (e.g., systematic growth of bureaucracy, improvement in the methods of bookkeeping, and so forth).

The rational choice viewpoint focuses on historical comparisons. The causes of actions of the individuals are rational choices, that is, the actor makes a rational decision. This perspective downplays the view of Vesterhen, while they see methodological individualism as context-bound (Swedberg). Adherents of this theoretical approach emphasize that it has the potential of increasing the links between substantive domains; while recognizing the imperfections of their proposals to explain a number of social problems, they highlight the fact that the anomalies that may result by using this method are major sources of new ideas for further research (Kiser & Hechter, 1998). This procedure “suggests a radical recasting of Weber’s viewpoint that, to a large extent, has been created after Weber’s death” (Swedberg).

Finally, interest analysis considers the interests of the individual or actor as the driven force of the cause of action. The adherents to this worldview incorporate Vesterhen, and their outlook of methodological individualism is social. The interest analysis is mainly involved in the study of different types of capitalisms (Swedberg).

Summary and Conclusions:

Commenting on Weber’s texts, Kalberg stated, “the task of sociology must always include the construction of theories” (Kalberg, pg. 204). These theories are frameworks that allow us to study analyze social behaviors, and then may the inferences that allow us to predict different outcomes (Henslin; Fichter).

The contentions to Weber’s hypotheses have been multidimensional, ranging from the specificity of the relationship between Calvinistic values and entrepreneurial attitudes, and the understanding of the principal components of Western culture as a whole (Giddens). In addition, it has been argued the emphasis in his investigations of the dominant role that the economic and political institutions plays in any given society, especially ours (Fichter), and the fact that he was not particularly interested in analyzing the problematic aspect of the dynamics of capitalism (Gerth & Mills). Yet, the methodology applied by him, notwithstanding its deficiencies, does not invalidate completely his survey.

The theories of world system, interpretative historical, and causal analysis, do not consider the importance of cultural forces besides the structural, demographic, economical, and even political forces (Kalberg). However, the different interpretations given to Weber’s sociology in America attempt to address those points not considered by the other theorists, even though, that they count with numerous critics (Somers, M. R., 1998; Kalberg).

Nonetheless, we may conclude that cultural factors (e.g., religion, family, and others subjective issues) are necessary in the analysis of social phenomena. In our pluralistic society, for instance, factors such as the individual cultural identity have to be taken into consideration if we seek to explain social issues such as the mobility and assimilation of certain ethnic groups.

As posited by Diop, C. A. (1991), three major factors contribute to the development of cultural identity, and that have to be included in a framework for the systematic study on intercultural relations: historical, linguistic, and psychological. The last variable, the psychological and which forms part of the subjective meanings or Vesterhen advanced by Weber, includes the unchanging relationships that are still present in different societies even after radical sociopolitical upheavals occurring within them (pp. 209-227).

The interdependency among the nations in today’s world because of the process of globalization and the impact that it has in our culture and of how we can predict different outcomes (Isaak, R. A., 2005; Polillo & Guillen, M. F., 2005; Nourzad, F., 2005; Gil, Szelenyi & Townsley, E., 2001; Davis & Robinson, R. V., 1996) makes the research on historical sociology indispensable.

References:

Calhoun, C. (1998). Explanation in historical sociology: Narrative, general theory, and historically specific theory (1). The American Journal of Sociology, 104 (3). Retrieved June 17, 2006, from Gale Thomson database.

Davis, N. J. & Robinson, R. V. (1996). Are the rumors of war exaggerated? Religious orthodoxy and moral progressivism in America. The American Journal of Sociology, 102 (3). Retrieved May 21, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Diop, C. A. (1991). Civilization and barbarism: An authentic anthropology. (1st. ed.). New York: Lawrence Hill Books.

Fichter, J. H. (1961). Sociology. (6th ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Gerth, H. H. & Mills, C. W. (1946). Introduction. From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Giddens, A. (1976). Introduction. The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. (1st ed.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Giddens, A. & Turner, J. (1987). Introduction. Social theory today. (1st ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Gil, E.; Szelenyi, I. & Townsley, E. (2001). The utopia of postsocialist theory and the ironic view of history in neoclassical sociology. The American Journal of Sociology, 106 (4). Retrieved May 21, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Goldstone, J. A. (1998). Initial conditions, general laws, path dependence, and explanation in historical sociology (1). The American Journal of Sociology, 104 (3). Retrieved June 17, 2006, from Thomson Gale database.

Henslin, J. M. (2005). Sociology: A down-to-earth approach. (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Isaak, R. A. (2005). The globalization gap: How the rich get richer and the poor get left further behind. (1st ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kalberg, S. (1994). Max Weber’s comparative-historical sociology. (1st. ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Kiser, E. & Hechter, M. (1998). The debate on historical sociology: Rational choice theory and its critics. The American Journal of Sociology, 104 (3). Retrieved May 21, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Lachmann, R. (1991). The Encyclopedic Dictionary of sociology. (4th ed.). Guilford: The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc.

Mahoney, J. (2004). Revisiting general theory in historical sociology. Social Forces, 83 (2). Retrieved June 17, 2006, from Thomson Gale database.

Nourzad, F. (2005). Macroeconomic and sectoral effects of international trade: A vector error-correction study. Atlantic Economic Journal, 33 (1). Retrieved June 14, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Polillo, S. & Guillen, M. F. (2005). Globalization pressures and the state: The worldwide spread of central bank independence (1). The American Journal of Sociology, 110 (6). Retrieved June 14, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Sica, A. (2004) Why “unobservables” cannot save eneral theory: A reply to Mahoney. Social Forces, 83 (2). Retrieved June 17, 2006, from Thomson Gale database.

Somers, M. R. (1998). “We’re no angels”: Realism, rational choice, and relationality in Social Science (1). (Response to Edgar Kiser and Michael Hechter, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 97, p1, 1991). The American Journal of Sociology, 104 (3). Retrieved June 17, 2006, from Gale Thomson database.

Swedberg, R. (2003). The changing picture of Max Weber’s sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 29. Retrieved May 21, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Wallerstein, I. (1987). World-systems analysis. Social theory today. (1st ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Weber, M. (1921[1976]). The Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism. (1st ed.). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Globalization and the American Economic Institution

2006-06-20T10:42:00.001-07:00

As Henslin (2005) posited, a social institution is part of the culture. Social relations, including social roles, form the major elements of any social institution. They are created by human beings; operate for, and through, them. These structures are realtively permanent (Fichter, 1961), and they are organized and unified, having each one of them their own set of values, roles, and norms.

Therefore, Henslin defined social institutions as the organized instruments that each society develops in order to meet its basic needs. Every society, from tribal to postindustrialized, whether it is traditional oriented or based on rationality, has social structures which are essential to them because without them social life would be unimaginable (Fichter).

Since the Middle Ages, the pattern of behavior that we observe in our postindustrial society was already present at some degree.

There are different institutionsby which our pluralistic society meets its basic needs and that, considered together, form our institutional system. Among them, we have, for instance, the family, religion, politics, law, economics, education, science, medicine, the military, and the mass media. The last one, mass media, plays an important role in our society, and it is considered as an emergent institution (Henslin). In addition, it is recognized the relevant role that this structure played during the Medieval period through the difussion of the literary output from antiquity to contemporary events.

These institutions are interdependent of one another, and even some of themcan be considered as part of a subgroup of a larger one (e.g., law as part of the political institution) (Fichter).

The economic structure in America has been used as an archetype for the sociological analysis of social institutions in postindustrial societies, and today it continues to be studied as such, given the influence that it has in the global economy.

Acording to Fichter, this structure configures the behaviors by which there is an exchange of commodities and services. It has different groups or organizations that are contained within it, such as banking, accounting, and the like; and it is considered the dominant institution within the complex American institutional system.

In our culture, the educational, religious, political, and familial institutions, are impacted by the transformations that occur in the economy.

Steger, M. B. (2002) made an important differentiation between the terms globalism and globalization. The former is defined as an ideological framework that imparts a set of norms, values, and connotations to globalization; while the latter refers to the ever-changing social development as it is identified and illustrated by different analysts, and, periodically, described in contradictory ways. Yet, globalization and globalism are used as interchangeable terms that convey the notion of an increase in the international trade and consumption of goods, including technology and information.

Thus, we might say that during the Middle Ages, before and then later, the world has experienced the increase of international interdependency, whilea globalistic framework was underway in order to assimilate the changes brought by the globalization of the culture.

Isaak, R. A. (2005) referred to globalization as the accelerated social and economic transformation that occurred in the sectors of finance, technology, and communication, and which culminated "in a radical drop in the cost of information".

According to Isaak, this change came after a series of steps were taken by the wealthy nations in order to free up global markets for those sectors in which they have a comparative advantage while protecting their own vulnerable sectors from the competition of low-wage countries.

The welthy nations imposed a series of rules that have to be applied as soon as possible in order to reap the benefits accordingly. Those measures are (Isaak):

Economic liberation: right to private property
Macroeconomic stabilization: control of inflation, cut deficits, convertible currency
Privatization: socialize costs and privatize gains

However, in some academic circles is disputed the conceptualization of globalization as an analytical model regarding the limits in the nature of the process, and even its originality (Steger).

Polillo & Guillen (2006) made a comprehensive study on the influence that globalization exerts in our economy, and, as a result, on how it affects the social institutions. Their theoretical approach was outlined based upon the systematic sociological premises of world-system, world-society, and neoinstitutional worldviews; and theirstudy used the empirical specificity of the independency of the central bank as the fundamental state structure dealing with monetary policy.

It was determined that globalization is shaping financial procedures "along more technocratic lines that tend to benefit certain groups of policy makers and external contituencies"; and this situation has made the executive branch of our government to lose control over monetary policy (Polillo & Guillen).

Some have viewed this argument as a validation that globalization is threatening the sovereignty of our nation. Additionally, a case can be made regarding this situation and the one experienced 1, 000 years ago in the "Roman Empire".

On the other hand, globalization, as an impressive trading increase phenomena, appears not to have too much effect on major macroeconomics variables, which is in harmony with those arguments that recognize international trade as just a microeconomic event that has consequences only at the sectoral level, instead of producing an "all-encompassing macroeconomic effects" (Nourzad, F., 2005). This microeconomic singularity does not preclude the fact that it has brought negative results for us (e.g., unemployment), and, thus, damaging other social structures of our culture (e.g., family, welfare system).

Furthermore, globalization has widened the gap between the rich and the poor, making it "thoroughly systematic" (Isaak). Wealthy nations have the possibility to adapt faster than those countries with limited resources, while at a microsociological level the same holds true for the individual: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer (Isaak).

As a result, Isaak posited that many crises are lurking in the near future, such as, unemployment, epidemics, enviromental degradation, and "the loss of legitimacy of American hegemony".

The process of globalization has dramatically influenced the makeover that we are experiencing today in our economic institution.

This development has made our dominant social structure more interdependent of foreign economic institutions, and, by inference, it has influenced the behavior of other American institutions, affecting more people in many ways than ever before.

Some segments of the American culture have moved at a rate faster than others have. This cultural lag has brought, among others, lack of medical care for many people, inconsistencies in the access to proper education, and changes in values and norms.

One area where the cultural lag is better observed is in communications. The constant and intensive flow of information have changed the way that many people interact in today's world, and not everybody have equal access to those technological innovations.

Notwithstanding the amount of research that has been done in this area, further studies should focus in the correlation that globalization is having in specific social organizations of our country. Additionally, systematic studies in historical sociology could assist us to evaluate properly a revolutionary development that encompasses the whole world.

References

Fichter, J. H. (1961). Institutions. "Sociology". (6th ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Henslin, J. M. (2005). "Sociology: A down-to-earth approach". (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Isaak, R. A. (2005). "The globalization gap: How the rich get richer and the poor get left further behind". (1st ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc.

Nourzad, F. (2005). Macroeconomic and sectoral effects of international trade: A vector error-correction study. "Atlantic Economic Journal", 33 (1). Retrieved June 14, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Polillo, S.; Guillen, M. F. (2005). Globalization pressures and the state: The worldwide spread of central bank independence (1). "The American Journal of Sociology", 110 (6). Retrieved June 14, 2006, from Infotrac database.

Steger, M. B. (2002). "Globalism: The new market ideology". (1st ed.). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Cultural identity

2006-05-26T09:16:00.000-07:00

The individual cultural identity is shaped by the people to whom a person belongs, and three major factors contribute to the development of that identity among any given society: historical, linguistic, and psychological.

Diop, C. A. (1991) posited that the historical factor gives us that "feeling of historical continuity lived by the totality of the collective". The linguistic factor, on the other hand, is a significant component, and is viewed as the "characteristic par exellence", affirms Diop, of cultural identity. And lastly, the psychological factor has played an important role in giving specifics sociocultural traits to different people throughtout history, although inadequately because the assesment on which it was based has been the product of taking into account, first and foremost, the literary output of those people and judging them accordingly; consequently, a better approach to the "psychic" factor, Diop proposed, should be initiated in a scientific fashion, including, among others, the unchanging relationships- from a cultural and psychological standpoint- that are still present in different societies even after radical sociopolitical upheavals that have ocurred within them (e.g., the aesthetic feelings which characterizes some cultures).

Therefore, Diop presented a framework for a systematic study on intercultural relations which considers not only the specificity of the linguistic expressions - with its limitations, notwithstanding-, but, also, this analysis should examine the levels "where the fundamental elements of the culture are elaborated", as well as those that "correspond to the universal [sic] concepts", that is, the values, norms, folkways, mores, and traits that are found in all cultures; and, in addition, the permanent or unchanging relationships still present within the society, which should be given special attention.

Although Diop was referring to the study of African societies for the most part, this framework, I consider, is necessary to properly evaluate other societies, and can be applied to the analysis of other cultures. A case in point, for instance, is the Cuban experience.

When Castro took the power in the island, Cuba was, for the most part, a prosperous nation, even though that it suffered from some maladies observed in many Latinamerican countries at that time, and even to some extent today, such as autocratic regimes, a culture of "caudillismo", unstable democracy, and so forth. However, economically, Cuba was considered the bridge of the Americas. The radical sociopolitical change brought by the Cuban Revolution, profoundily affected the cultural identity of the society. Most studies on the dynamics of the Cuban revolutionary process ignore the lower and intermediate strata while focus their attention to the leadership, and on how that leadership has been successful or not in managing the economy and opposing the "evil of imperialism". Fitzgerald (1994) made the point that further studies should include those actors, and, I should add that those actors are the ones that could permit us to examine accordingly the Cuban cultural identity.

First let me point out that Cuba before Castro was an example of a different kind of "capitalism" which, contrary to what some classical sociologists have conceptualized, has never been an unitary system (Eyal, Szelenyi & Townsley [2001]).

It is important to notice, also, that Cuba is an example on how "socialism" cannot be viewed - and sociologically studied, for that matter- as a single entity. I concur with Eyal, Szelenyi &Townsley that sociology should engage in an agenda of "comparative capitalisms", and, I must add, that it should engage in the study of "comparative socialisms", because there are many differences between the Cuban experience and the one lived by the European countries (we cannot forget other societies like the Korean and Chinese which have had a very different approach).

The Cuban Revolution has been a traumatic occurrence for that society, however, embedded within the Cuban cultural identity there are psychological traits that still remain unchanchanged, and, among them, we have the industriousness of the people.

Johnson (1997) stated that the growth of the Cuban community that emigrated to the United States has been impressive, even though the intentions by the Cuban regime to poison that community; Cuban-Americans have become " the richest and most influential political lobby after the Jewish Lobby, and its 2 million members generated a Gross Domestic Product eleven times larger than that of Cuba itself". And Miami, the capital of the Cuban Exile, as many Cubans find pleasure in referring to the city, became the "financial, economic, communications, and cultural center" that link the United States with the rest of Latin America. As Johnson concludes that the United States is indeed the grand beneficiary of the Cuban Exile, induced by the Cuban Revolution.

Now, the "socialistic" reforms brought by Castro and his associates did not teach industriousness to the Cuban people ( neither they taught the Cubans to play baseball, and dance, for instance), that was imbedded in the "psychic" of the people, and, when given the right conditions, it found a way to be developed once again and flourished, because everything that Miami represents today for the United States, Havana used to be before Castro took over.

We might conclude, then, that Diop's framework to assess appropriately the cultural identity of a group of people must include in that evaluation the permanent or unchanging relationships present in the society, and that their intransience is notorious even after radical sociopolitical upheavals have occured within them.

In addition, although this brief qualitative analysis intended to cover the outline given by Diop, is interesting to annotate that is necessary to address historical issues properly in order to enhance the quality of research that is done in sociology (Kiser & Hechter [1998]), and by which we are pretty much indebted to the works on that subject done by Max Weber. On this regard, we should ackowledge that a better understanding of these issues will allow us to put in proper perspective the shape of societies emerging from different kinds of "dysfunctional" capitalism- as I would rather refer to those societies that have a market economy but where the society itself is repressed of expressing themselves openly and with institutions heavely corrupted-, as well as societies emerging from "socialism".

What do you think?

References

Diop, C. A. (1991). Cultural identity. Civilization and barbarism; An authentic Anthropology (1st ed.). New York: Lawrence Hill Books (pp. 209-227).

Eyal, Szelenyi & Townsley (2001). The utopia of postsocialist theory and the ironic view of history in neoclassical sociology.The American Journal of Sociology 106(4); pp. 1121-1131.

Johnson, P. (1997). A history of the American people. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Fitzgerald, F. T. (1994). The Cuban Revolution in crisis: From managing Socialism to managing survival. (1st. ed.). New York: Monthly Review Press.

Kiser & Hechter (1998). The debate on historical Sociology: Rational choice theory and its critics. The American Journal of Sociology, 104(3), pp. 785-814.

Power and sexiness

2006-05-25T09:21:00.000-07:00

There is a sociological research that analyzed two main characteristics associated with power, that is, power as "status", and power in function of a relationship between two persons, and on how the position or status enyoyed could affect the way that the other look at him or her.

First, the author explored the sociological theories of attraction based, among others, upon the premises postulated by evolutionary psychology.

Secondly, a large set of data on interpersonal relationships is used. It is important to notice that this quantitative analysisis based on a national sample of sixty naturally ocurring communities, having the advantage of high sociological validity, as well as being representative of groups that cared about their status and its effects on their relationships. The researcher seems to consider that this national sample is inclusive enough not to limit the scope in which the findings from one group can be applied to other groups or populations.

Finally, the answer to the question- Is power sexy(1)?- lies in the fact that it is but not always. This study found a lack of connection between men's status and their sexiness, which is odd when compared with long held principles in evolutionary psychology. Furthermore, when it comes to men judging women, the author concluded that "what is sexy about power is the effect of women's status".

Even though this analysis is not considered definitive, it raises an important issue: differentiating power regarding status and its impact on relationships. Also, this study indicated that there is a gender-based awareness regarding the conceptualizations of "position of power" and "relations": the former is heavily weighted by people when they consider the sexiness of women, while the latter is more relevant when others evaluate men.

The article in question was written by J. P. Martin. What do you think?

Reference

Martin, J. P. (2005). Is power sexy (1)? The American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), pp. 408-439. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved May 23rd, 2006 from Infotrac database.

Porridge lover Nation

2005-04-26T10:18:00.000-07:00

The other day I was chatting with a friend that recently moved from sunny California to Utah, and, in order to tease her, I asked if she moved over there because she was a Mormon, you know the cliche that everybody living in Utah are Mormons. She said no, and I began to apologize in case that she may have felt offended. However, I was wrong, she was laughing heartily - she typed "HAHAHAHA", which in internet chatting rooms means a heartily laugh, I guess-, and told me that she is asked that question frequently.

That's how people typecast other people, regions, events, whole nations, and even historic periods. I believe that stereotypes exist since the Creation, when God Himself began to label every thing created. Yet, we are specialists in putting people in a pigeonhole, classifying and categorizing that that we find in our path.

For instance, around 1583 Philip Stubbes on "The Anatomie of Abuses", described, or deprecated I should have said, the game of football - here in America we call it soccer-, which he portrayed as a criminal activity. The Puritan Stubbes explained about the game:
".... Hereof growth envy, malice, rancor, choler, hatred, displeasure, enmity and what not else: and sometimes fighting, brawling, contention, quarrel picking, murder, homicide and great effusion of blood, as experience daily teacheth"
Sport or felony?, it's like Stubbes could be called the Chronicler of Hooliganism in Sixteenth Century England.

We tend to view, or better put, to categorize events, places, people and so forth, in accordance with our principles and costume; therefore, anything different of whatever we might find acceptable or not by our standards, will be ridiculed, laughed at, scorned, and typecast as belonging to a certain kind of people, usually inferior to us.

The Scottish, for example, are a cabbage eating nation, porridge lovers, who don't know anything about the art of cooking, vulgarly eat oat cakes, and, of course, heavy drinkers of wine and ale. That's the impression of a Fynes Moryson, on his travels around Scotland, circa Sixteenth Century. Moreover, according to Fynes, the English are a little more refined because they "...hold all excesse blameworthy and drunkenesse a reproachfull vice."

Moryson traveled for ten years, and in that span he visited Germany, Bohemia, Netherlands, Switzerland, Denmark, Poland, Italy, Turkey, France, England, Scotland, and Ireland.; his observations were compiled and published on 1617, while the events, places and people that he so colorful describes, happened on the first three years of the century.

The more distanced the people were from each other, the more differences would be appreciated and the more crude the stereotype would be. For an English of the Sixteenth Century, an Italian would be considered a papist, whether he followed the teachings of Christ or not, it didn't matter; by the same token the French were sissy and the Spaniards were a race of brutes. The point of view of the French with regard to the English might have been similar, and that would have happened with the rest of the world :
contempt, ridicule, and in some cases even admiration, are the regular features of the stereotypes.

So, the next time that someone implies that because you live in Utah you are a Mormon, or because your name is Hadrian you are building a wall, take a good laugh and type "HAHAHAHA" or just say "yeah , right".

The Mailbag

2005-04-25T07:24:00.000-07:00

Publishing a blog is fun but also kind of hard. The word publish comes from the Middle English "publicen", "publishen", to make known publicly, which is an alteration of Old French "publier", which comes from the Latin "publicare". To publish is to advertise, broadcast, declare, proclaim, but no-where is found the word hard. Hard as difficult, implying that you must have skill to do it ( I'm not very skillful in that deparment), and hard as arduous, which implies that a spiritual effort is needed (well, at least I have the guts to do it anyway).
However, don't take me wrong, blogging is fun but to do it right takes time to learn. For me, I think that it will take like forever.
Moreover, one of the things with blogging is that you have the obligation to reply to those that took their time to read any of your postings.
Therefore, although this blog is still under construction, today I'm starting this section, "The Mailbag", where I will try to acknowledge all the comments and/or suggestions received during the week. So, help me God.
After posting a group of sites on April 19, I received a suggestion by Lisa Spangeberg, a fellow blogger with Digital Medievalist Scela- she could be reached @ http://www.digitalmedievalist.com - bringing the attention to "Medievalist Blogs", which is maintained by Shana Worthen. (http://www.fishpond.owlfish.com/medievallogs.html ).
The reason that I didn't include the webpage of Ms. Worthen is because I found that some of the blogs listed didn't deal with that thematic at all. Nevertheless, I contacted Ms. Worthen explaining what I found and she very kindly answered that Medievalist Weblogs is focused on occupation, not content. The webpage is a list of Medievalist who run weblogs. In addition, there is a column included in the list under the title of "Frequency of Content", which gives an indication of what percentage of content is related to the Middle Ages for any given blog, and in case that any of them is labeled "rarely" , it means that it will be unlikely that you might find any material at all covering and/or related to that historic period.
Thanks Lisa and Shana.
Finally, Rightland, another fellow blogger who publishes "From the Rightland", suggested "Authenticity-oriented Medieval and Renaissance Reenactment/Living History Groups". As its name indicates different activities are held, all in the UK, through out the year. One of the main events will be held from April 30 thru May 2 at Fritton Lake Country Park, where a cross-section of life in England (950 - 1066 AD) could be experienced. Check it out @ http://www.regia.org, and @ http://moas.atlantia.sca.org/topics/groups.html . Thanks Rightland.
Your comments and suggestions are appreciated, they make the blogging experience satisfying. So, bring 'em on. Thanks.

The changing of the guard.

2005-04-21T09:50:00.000-07:00

The passing of John Paul II last week revived the discussion about the universality of the Catholic Church. The charisma shown by the last Pope was one of the reasons that the church, in some way, helped him to deal with several issues, such as the sexual predators priests, which did put the Roman Curia in a difficult position.
Moreover, in the last 20 years or so, John Paul II was seen as a gifted benevolent ruler and possessor of that diplomatic tact that is known in the ecclesiastic circles as “romanitas”. He was able to preserve the moral ground that people might expect from the Church, especially among the faithful. Indeed, he gained political capital after surviving the murderous attempt by a KGB operative almost at the beginning of his pontificate, serving him in his political standing against the communist governments, in particular in his native Poland. For the rest of his reign as Vicar of Christ on earth, he was maintained that charismatic clout of being a fighter against injustice, and an orthodox in matter of faith.
This coming Sunday, the recently elected Pope Benedict XVI, called a doctrinal ally of the late pope, will officially begin his Papacy and speculation begun on how his pontificate would be because he is considered as orthodox as the late Pope.
Because of all this, the political pundits and theologians have been talking in the past days about, among other things, the universality of the church. As expected, some have begun to analyze how the church has arrived to this point after the Reformation. Furthermore, the whole Reformation has been depicted as the doings of Luther along which is not the case. Historical revisionism is practiced nowadays with impunity; and the so called historians are just trying to insert today’s political agendas onto yesterday’s events.
Let’s summarize the process that permitted that an obscure Agustinian monk in Germany, in sixteenth century, was able to produce such an earth shattering revolution that produced the schism of the otherwise powerful Papacy.
Europe at that time was expanding swiftly; escalating its powerful presence in the Americas as well as strengthening its foothold in parts of Asia and Africa. This expansion was made possible by all the economic and socio-cultural changes that allowed, or were favorable, to the development of new techniques that facilitated navigation, exploration, and so for.
This growth enriched all the emerging European nations; and in Germany, the ruling class began to feel that the less oppressive and excessive the central monarchy was, much better for them.
On the other hand, Charles V’s desire to give a practical meaning to the word empire, called for an intensification of his Holy writ. The loose confederacy of European nations, known as the Holy Roman Empire, should be, according to Charles V and his advisors, closely managed in order to make stronger the whole empire.
The Germans princes began to rebel against these imperials ideas of Charles, and, in times where religion and politics were not clearly delineated, the figure of Martin Luther, and his theological ideas, was used by the oppossitors. Luther’s ideas were not new; for decades now innumerable objections have been raised, against the corruption of the papacy, and the decision that the final judgment of who was able or not to gain God’s favor belonged to the cleric alone, by figures such as Wycliffe and Meister Earckhart, among others. When Luther nailed his theses, there was an extensive bibliography on that regard.
Luther was used as the figure necessary to achieve the political goals in dissuading Charles of his hemonogenism and bringing down the robust influence of Rome.
Therefore, it was not so much about an ideological quarrel, inasmuch an economical conflict. And with it, Europe embarked on the worst struggle of its history. For little more than a century the continent was ravaged with blood and dreadful civil disorders, which culminated with the Treaty of Westphalia.
This treaty gave birth to what has been called the Europe of Nations. Moreover, new legal concepts were created, although in a very sketchy way, such as “international community” and “respect for national sovereignty”. Another feature of this agreement- signed by all the European nations- was the stripping down of the political power enjoyed by Rome; this treaty was the end of the roman cleric as international arbiter. What is more, each state was responsible of the kind of religious observed on its realm, therefore, even though to be relegated to a mere overseer on religious matters, it lost the universality that had had since the fifth century.
Nonetheless, the papacy had always commanded certain kind of respect by the secular powers- even Stalin, an anecdote goes, asked how many divisions the Pope had-, and with the passing of times nations have sought its support for the implementations of different policies with worldwide implications, and a few have won that support expressed by the complicit silence of the church in front of barbaric practices.
The church itself plus the economic, cultural and social conditions of those times were the cause that Rome lost its power, as it had been known, and not the mere historical presence- dogmatic and anti-Semitic, I should add- of Martin Luther.
The church had faced many challenges since its creation. Today the challenges, different in nature to the ones faced centuries ago, need to be addressed not in order to appease the faithful but to reach to those of us that, been non-Catholics, still look at the church as allied of just causes and as supporter of sound and, why not, divine principles. Issues like abortion, gay marriage, and so forth need to continue to be denounced by the Roman church.

Some medievalist web pages.

2005-04-19T07:49:00.000-07:00

There are several web pages dedicated to Medieval history, and are a good source for research. Not only texts and images can be downloaded from these sites, but also they are a source for links to Universities, Museums, etc.
The list that I compiled is not definitive at all; in future postings I plan to include much more sites. Also, I want to invite you to suggest a site, and I will be glad to post it.

For Celtic studies the Digital Medievalist is a good beginning, check it out @ http://www.digitalmedievalist.com. I should have said the "Opinionated" Medievalist, but check by yourselves. I found it good.
For Irish historians everything related to it you MUST go to http://www.ucc.ie/celt/ , with a good database where several works, articles, etc., can downloaded.
The classic place to go, because is well organized and, most importantly, free, is the Georgetown University and its project "Labyrinth". Go to http://www.georgetown.edu/labyrinth, and enjoy.
Rhodes University is the home of "artes liberales", you might say. I go often to their site, which is as organized as the one of Georgetown Univ. Visit http://www.rhodes.edu, and search for Orb, which is the project including the Medieval project, and containing good sources for research.
There is a place called Luminarium, which combines three sites that were created in 1996 for those interested in English literature and it counts with the support of many scholars from around the world. The site is expected to expand in the future, but as of now, it is an excellent site for those interested in English literature from the Medieval, Renaissance, and 17 th Century. It includes essays prepared by students, as well as professors from different universities. Visit http://www.luminarium.org.
The University of Rochester has two projects that are fun to go to. One is the Camelot project (at http://www.rochester.edu ), which offers images, texts, bibliographies, and more, associated to the Arthurian legend. The other project is called Robin Hood, and, as its name implies, offers a lot of information regarding that legendary hero, and you can even check out the films made about that witty and beloved felon. Search for Camelot and Robin Hood on the University site and you will be directed to both sites.
Avista is a site that publishes articles and essays about medieval science and technology. I was reading one by Steven A. Walton "An introduction to the Mechanical Arts in the Middle Ages" which is very interesting and as introduction, as he says, "not earth-shattering". Visit Avista at http://www.avista.org, and check Kalamazoo where you can find out everything regarding the sessions at the International Congress on Medieval Studies which is celebrated annually at Western Michigan University at Kalamazoo, and where between 15 and 20 papers are presented each year.
Last but not least, the British Museum. Different projects and exhibitions, but especially for the manuscripts in its collections. Go to http://www.british-museum.ac.uk.
Finally, for those that want to check a work printed in english between the years 1477 and 1799 go to "Renascence Editions"( I've tried the University of Oregon site but I couldn't get there),yowill find the works of Milton, Montaigne (the John Florio translation of 1603), Spenser, Bacon, Shakespeare, Bekerley and others. However, it lacks one important item: the 1611 edition of the Bible. And the Internet Medieval History Sourcebook maintained by Dr. Paul Halsall, from Fordham University @ http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook.html, is a site with a general information. Very Good !.

There are more sites but, again, this is just a partial list. I have more sites that expect to publish in the future, but I think that the sites listed are very good; and many of them offer links to several other sites.

Send your comments and suggestions.

The serpent and the genius.

2005-04-18T09:58:00.000-07:00

When the papacy returned to Rome brought with it the richness and prestige Rome needed to ascend once again to new heights. Even though the Pope was a different kind of monarch, his court was one of the richest in Europe. The papacy was responsible for conducting the religious business of saving lives but more importantly of governing the difficult and sometimes turbulent Papal States. How the papacy came to be this way is a matter for another posting. Now let's focus on how this corrupt papacy helped to create the conditions for that humanistic expression represented in the High Middle Ages, also known as the Renaissance or Revival of Learning.
The election of Pope Alexander VI to the papacy help to sink much more the papacy in a corruption quagmire. The reign of Rodrigo Borgia as Pope Alexander VI was characterized as one were the advancement of his own family was the task that mattered the most. His daughter Lucrezia was used, we should say abused, by his own father in order to gain more political power. However, many of the imputations thrown at her, and for extension to her family , are disputed today by some historians. Nevertheless, Alexander is known as the Renaissance Pope.
The moral degradation that the papacy had slipped into, while the city itself rose to new heights, began to reverse with the ascension to the throne of St. Peter of Julius II and, very especially I will add, Leo X.
The Golden Age of Rome began. The city and its rulers were admired and respected.
As the ascendancy of the church over the Italian people- the use of the term "Italian" at this point in time is just for referencing purpose to include the people of the whole peninsula, because we can not talk about an Italian identity yet, which would be coming much later-and, tangibly, the arts, it began to provide constant work for the artists of this period.
The church ran into an enormous debt to finance in part the the works commissioned, and the decisions taken later, during the reign of Leo X, to alleviate this malady will proven to be nefarious for the papacy. The selling of indulgences would have a negative impact in the church, and it would never be same. The corruptions of Alexander VI were bad but the sell-out of Leo X was the last drop. Years later the Counter Reformation would make matter worse.
Anyway, the arts in this period, in general, remained for the most part religious oriented, from a thematically standpoint, but humanistic in essence.
Humanism has been defined in different ways, and every scholar gives his or her opinion and stamp a definition that, then, is repeated over and over again, but for the most part everybody agrees that it was the backbone of this period that we call Renaissance. Mankind consists, the reasoning went, of rational beings, capable of good but, also, of evil; truth and lies, power and weakness; in a word, human beings, that were able to reach for the highest goals and achieve them was the task at hand. That the classic works of the ancient Greeks and Romans were celebrated, no doubt about it, but that that was all about the Renaissance, I do not think so. Many classics began to be accessible to more people, but it didn't mean that the classics were copied; they were discussed, argued, analyzed, but the job -the thinking process- was theirs and only they could do it. The Greeks were good but the people that were living in the Renaissance were better. They did it!
One of those works of this period was the Last Supper, by Leonardo.
The paint captures one of the most intriguing moments in the life of Jesus: the moment of him predicting his betrayal.
The humanism of the painting is given on the fact that Jesus , at that very moment, seems to be the loneliest person on the face of earth, while the disciples can not hide their surprise at hearing the announcement made by their beloved Rabbi.
In John 13:18-30, we can, literally, "see" a man "troubled in spirit" announcing "one of you is going to betray me". Simon Peter, quick to defend his Master, motioned to John who "was reclining next to him" and "said, ask him which one he means".
While Jesus was given the answer, or at the very moment that he was getting ready to do so, the photographic genius of Leonardo seemed to snap the picture.
Isolation, anger, frustration, all these and more was present in that moment. Everybody ismoving, everyone is reacting, but for Jesus, for he is alone, there is a space that separates him from the rest, there is some distance. Many are called but only one is the "only begotten Son".
However, there have been people that had read the painting in a different way, some have even hinted at the possibility that the one sited next to Jesus is no other than Mary of Magdala. Others had made asseverations that Leonardo wanted to cast a new light in the relationship that Jesus had with Mary, and others, "mentes calientes" you may say, have speculated about the antagonistic relationship of Mary and the disciples. In addition Leonardo has been casted as someone rebelling against the oppressive and censorious attitude of the church. It could be that Leonardo felt sometimes oppressed, but the truth is, as long as historical prove could be, that the reason he felt like that is because he was more pleased with the things that he liked, such as inventing and engineering, than with what he saw as a regular job.
I have learned to appreciate Leonardo. I have gone through the manuscripts of the New Testament, especially John, and I have read the painting differently. It has illuminated me of many things, even of what is going on with our lives and with others; on how the human condition has always been the same, and on how fragile is our perception of people or events, because they are constantly shaped into new forms.
St. Thomas of Aquinas said "Ars est ratio factibilium"; and this painting is about God constrained Himself because of His humanity, trapped in a human body, surrounded and filled with love and concern by His closest followers, and at the same time, circumstantially isolated. The suffering is in the horizon, the end is near, no one could change it. No one can take His place: in order to gather His flock, He must go to the cross. It is not by chance that this is happening, it is not accidental! Everything will happen out of love; God's love for His creation. But the betrayal comes first! His announcement is dramatic; it causes a disturbing ripple effect across the table: the reactions of Jesus companions are eloquent, and I think that they can only be comprehended when we put ourselves in their position. They did not perceive him as we do today; for them he was their Rabbi, and only later on they would come to the realization of who He really was. Then, how can be explained to those present there not only the necessity of this whole situation but also, and most importantly I should add, the urgency of the suffering and death that is coming? Jesus did not feel compelled to explain it! Leonardo did not use the proper technique of fresco, as could have been expected in a major work like this one, and I think that the reason was superior to his will. Sometimes I have wondered if God was caught by a Renaissance paparazzo and felt angry about it and did not allow the paint to survive in a more long-lasting medium; or was His plan all along to allow us to catch a brief glimpse of the differences between the human and divine nature? The corruptible, frail, and precarious essence of nature itself, compared to the durable, everlasting, and enduring effect of His love for us due to His godliness.
And that is, in my opinion, what we admire today in this Leonardo's painting: the picture that his genius took of God at one of His most intimate moments: talking alone with His disciples; the miracle of manhood and godliness residing in one body.
The genius lived with the serpent- the corrupt and despondent church-, was fed by her, benefited of her, and yet the result was so divinely human. That is what the Renaissance was all about, men like Leonardo, Michelangelo, and many others produced masterpieces like the Last Supper but more significantly it was a movement that tried to capture a divine dimension of the human spirit in every endeavor, whether it was in arts, education, literature, and so forth. It was about bringing man to his alter ego.

Worldliness

2005-04-16T08:51:00.000-07:00

As Jacob Burckhardt said in his book "The civilization of the Renaissance in Italy", the worldliness of the Renaissance contrasts with the Middle Ages. But where he saw " the flood of new thoughts, purposes, and views, which transformed the mediaeval conception of nature and man", I see it as a way the recycling the ancient knowledge of past generations (Greek, Byzantine, etc.) that at that moment began to be available to everyone thanks to the "invention" of printing. Printed books, which later were more accessible to more people, allowed the distribution of renewed translations of the classics, taking that from a selected group of people to a majority that received an influence which furthered not only the arts, with the advancements of techniques and styles, but also creating the base for further technological advancement. Until the finishing blow dealt by the Counter-Reformation, with its censorship to protect itself against criticism, the Renaissance more than new thoughts, and more than the "rediscovery of the Greeks" is, as George Clarke Sellery called on his essay " The Renaissance: Its nature and Origins", the greatest Revival of Learning, and "its concomimitants, but an evolution, based on the same forces, generally speaking, that are are work in the world today".

If history teaches us something, everything that happened during those centuries that shaped Europe explains what is going on today with the EU.

This blog is about all that.