has raised thousands of pounds to support refugees.
Monday, 6 February 2017
Monday, 23 January 2017
It is essentially about the validation of power and its attendant mythology generally seeks to tell a story that justifies this. In earlier societies the ritual adoption of power was linked to religious and cultural affiliations and to the land itself rather than the institutional formulation of a state. So a leader would ‘marry’ the land in the shape of a Goddess. In an early Irish tale the ruler Conn is taken into an Otherworld dwelling to be given a drink from the Cup of Sovereignty by a woman who is referred to as ‘The Sovereignty of Ireland’ and returns to his own hall with the cup as a symbol of his right to rule. In the countries of medieval Europe that symbol became the Crown, worn by monarchs who reigned as representatives of God on Earth. Although the idea of sovereignty in the institution of the nation state is essentially secular, it retains elements of these earlier religious ideas in its developmental history and in the retention of monarchs in some states and the secular equivalent of presidents in others. The religious roots of the idea of sovereignty as delegated divine power are still alive outside of the western democracies as recent events in the Middle East graphically testify.
But if the western liberal democracies have left these religious justifications behind them, where does the justification of sovereignty come from? To some extent it is traditional and still rooted in those older ideas which retain some of their power to compel the loyalties of citizens. More recently the driving force of such states has been capitalist economics and the binding mythology has been that of ‘The Market’. But Capital, - and The Market - has driven globalisation with a logic which has left the idea of the nation state behind. The response to that has been either to see larger political and economic groupings such as the European Union as expressions of the needs of globalised capital to operate more efficiently, or to see them as necessary regulatory mechanisms to check the excesses of capital on a scale that can be effective in a way that the nation state alone cannot be. Arguably both of these views are valid.
So where does sovereignty now lie? If the answer is that it lies with Capital and its mythology is that of the global market, it is also true that this is a sovereignty that does not command the allegiance of all who participate in the societies in which it operates. The ties of sovereign loyalties are complex in such societies and, understandably, responses are confused and not always coherent. Attachments to the nation state remain as people try to hold on to tokens of belonging. But there are are also attachments to the idea of humanity as a common cause and of the Earth as a common home. These too make valid demands on our sovereign loyalties. What can we distil from this? Certainly the progressive rather than regressive nationalisms of Scotland and Wales can return us to an attachment to the land we live on, and the cultures we inhabit, without binding us to institutions that do not serve our needs. But I doubt if we can characterise this as a ‘post-sovereignty world’.
Sovereignty, and the mythology that sustains it, needs to be understood, engaged with, and imaginatively transformed if we are to take ownership of our sense of belonging both to the imagined space of our land and the wider world with which it interacts and by which it is sustained. We need the resources both to challenge the forces which command our allegiance to unacceptable powers and to develop alternative versions of sovereign allegiance to powers that are wielded on our behalf, for our common benefit and which are accountable to our common will. ‘Post Sovereignty’ describes what we are not. We need a ‘Present Sovereignty' that tells us who we are and exercises power in a way that acknowledges our responsibility for the world we inhabit and for for the life with which we share it.
*Review by Colin Kidd of of The Marches by Rory Stewart in London Review of Books 39:2 Jan 2017
Tuesday, 17 January 2017
John Keats, writing to his brothers in 1817, introduced the term ‘negative capability’ to describe a condition wherein a writer “is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason”. This has always been for me a touchstone, not only for writing but also for living. I have also regarded some of the words of S. T. Coleridge, similarly, as points of departure for my thought. But Keats meant his words as a rejoinder to writers such as the older Coleridge who was distracted from the pursuit of writing as an instinctual activity - as in poems such as ‘The Ancient Mariner’ and ‘Christabel’ - by an interest in idealist philosophy and literary theory.
Both of those poems, like those of Keats, are of course worked up into a form, unlike, perhaps, Coleridge’s ‘Kubla Khan’ which might be cited as an example of visionary experience untrammelled by any “reaching after fact and reason”. But Coleridge regarded this as an unfinished fragment and had to find an excuse for publishing it many years after it was written. His “abstruser musings” in the realm of literary theory also led to the distinction he made between ‘Fancy’ and ‘Imagination’, the latter being the facility by which we see through those mysteries, which we are are negatively capable of inhabiting, to the process of creation : so the negative becomes a positive and the unconscious capability produces a consciously shaped artefact.
Consider Keats’ ‘Ode to Psyche’. He says in the poem that he “wander’d in a forest thoughtlessly” until he came across Eros and Psyche “In deepest grass, beneath the whisp’ring roof / Of leaves ….” and then decided to become Psyche’s priest. This could be taken as a template for the transition from an unconscious state of perception to the conscious decision to follow the impulse to engage in an act of imaginative creation. In a letter of 1819 referring to the composition of this poem, Keats says that “Psyche was not embodied as a goddess before the time of Apuleius” (the author of the story of Eros and Psyche, written in the 2nd century c.e.). She begins the story as a mortal but is immortalised at the end of it, though too late in history to become established in the Roman pantheon. Keats adds that “I am more orthodox than to let a heathen Goddess be so neglected” and so begins the Ode : “O Goddess hear …”.
‘Psyche’ can mean ‘Mind’, ‘Soul’ or in the terminology of Jungian psychology, ‘Anima’. This is a puzzling range of definitions if we are “reaching after fact and reason”, but in the context of the story, and of the poem, they are wedded in Psyche’s desire to know who is her secret lover, in her embodiment of the yearned for other, and as the object of eros, and so the beloved of Eros. If the gods are experienced in spite of “uncertainties, mysteries, doubts” and take form “without any irritable reaching after fact and reason”, they are imaginatively constructed in our stories about them, as here, by finding them in a mind that already knows them and gives them form.
Coleridge defined the imaginative faculty, “the prime agent of all human perception”, as the power that shapes such stories. Although the emphasis is different, and although Keats had little time for such theorising, his finding a place for Psyche “ In some untrodden region of my mind” is not so far from a realisation of Coleridge’s definition. Keats composed long poems apparently effortlessly. But he died at the age of 26. Coleridge lived to the palindromically older age of 62, in spite of his opium habit, and struggled to compose verse in his later years. Would Keats have continued to write with effortless fluency had he lived longer? Would we think of Coleridge differently if we only had 'The Ancient Mariner', 'Kubla Khan' and the first part of 'Christabel' to go by? Perhaps. But in bringing together Psyche as ‘Mind’ and Psyche as ‘Soul’ he was surely as much her priest as Keats for whom Psyche as 'Soul' was prominently Psyche as ‘Anima’.
Tuesday, 15 November 2016
Every time I look
into the well
the level is the same
it never rises nor falls.
No water is drawn from it
these days, not for drinking
nor for healing. Little rain
Runs in around the slate cover
over the grill that tops the shaft.
Around the edges a shiver
might be seen on the flat surface
beneath, the dark water
inscrutably responsive to enquiry,
deflecting the question
for further articulation.
This is tranquility, and yet
yards away the stream rushes
over the bank above and crashes
noisily to its channel below
when in full flood, or ebbs
back to a trickle
after a dry spell:
It is not constant like the well.
Is it the well
Where the pool lies still
Beneath the grill cover,
Or the nearby falls
Where the stream fills
The air with living water?
Sunday, 18 September 2016
It is the smell of water mint that resonates in memory, conjuring the path through the boggy meadow along the stream where it grows and scents the air with sweet astringency.
It was a sultry day and, sticky with sweat, I stood beneath the shade of a willow sheltering from the sun, the banks of cut branches forming the dam across the stream luxuriant with mint.
Dragonflies hung in the air and swooped for pond-skaters on the stilled water. They said we would be lucky to see beavers and we saw none. But the dam, and the gnawn twigs discarded on the bank, made them known.
If a beaver would dive now into the peaty stream it would be luck indeed, but I counted it lucky just to be here on a still day in late summer waiting for a splash that did not come; fulfilled by the place itself and everything that was there, seen and unseen.
Thursday, 11 August 2016
How many miles to Babylon?
Sunday, 3 July 2016
|Ned Thomas of Aberystwyth's Mercator Institute addressing the 'ALL EQUAL' event on the sea front.|
The Referendum campaign seemed nothing less that an exercise in collective irresponsibity and the disarray following its outcome a fitting conclusion to the process. In spite of my dismay at the outcome I had expected it and was only surprised by the surprise of the financial markets who had predicted a Remain vote. So much for them as indicators of how things are.
The tide of xenophobia unleashed during the campaign and manifesting itself in its aftermath is disturbing, quite apart from the longer-term social consequences of the outcome. It was heartening, then, to be able to attend a gathering on the seafront in Aberystwyth where the flags of many nations, including many minority and/or 'disputed' nations, fly to celebrate diversity. The event was organised not so much to dispute the outcome of the Referendum, but to affirm the equality of all the inhabitants of the town and of the wider country wherever they are from.
There were speeches, poems, songs and statements of affirmation of this principle and we were all invited to wear a safety pin to represent the fact that we are all pinned together as common citizens of the world. We concluded by joining hands in a chain under those flags all along the Promenade. It's good to be part of a community that can organise such an event at short notice and get such a good turnout to support it.