Not very important

October 29, 2007

I was in Ottawa last week, to look into employment possibilities. It was the first time I’d actually been to a Canadian city, and I was favorably impressed. It gave me some sense of what the United States might have looked like if the separation from Britain hadn’t occurred. Given that we seem to be moving towards a form of absolute monarchy anyway, maybe the separation wasn’t really worth all the trouble. (I payed a brief visit to Canada ten years ago, but that was entirely by accident: a plane on which I was flying from Vienna to New York made an emergency stop at Goose Bay, Labrador, and in the process blew two tires. We were bused to a nearby restaurant and treated to a free meal while we waited twelve hours for another plane to arrive from the United States, to take us the rest of the way.)

I probably would do well to avoid political discussion altogether for a considerable time. The subject depresses me terribly, and I am aware (or should be) that I don’t really have all that much to say about it. It would lead me into consideration of all sorts of things about which I had better not speak, like, e.g., the possibility that the World Trade Center was brought down by timed explosives. Also, I really do need to return to the original purpose for which this blog was started, which was to provoke myself to write about John Bekkos.

This is one of those weeks when, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me, my heart is very heavy. Maybe it is the deferred effect of autumn.

4 Responses to “Not very important”

  1. I am fascinated by Bekkos, and I look forward to further posts about him. I look forward even more to your translation of “De Unione”. Please, keep it coming!

  2. Vito Says:

    I second the comment of cathedraunitatis.

  3. ben mann Says:

    heavy-hearted here, too, with not much more reason. though fall does contribute. it’s not all bad… brahms weather.

    i can’t talk politics with anyone, either–


    –which perhaps means that you and i could have an interesting and non-depressing talk on the subject. if such is still possible.

    i’m to the point where i no longer care who brought down the towers, nor how, nor why. the entire incident is dwarfed by what the PNAC folks made of it, and as such, it’s relatively unimportant who even did it– we know whose pretext it became, and how. strangely postmodern words i hear myself saying– but if anyone knows that the territory need no longer precede the map, and that the narrative sometimes matters more than the facts, it’s wolfowitz/perle et al.

    but then, i’m really not trying to start a political conversation on your blog. at least, not one of this sort.

    i am still considering your response to my off-the-cuff comments about romans 9 to 11. a mystery and a minefield, that one. i’m certain that i spoke both too soon and too broadly– but then, overreactions against reformed theology are a specialty around here. i appreciate you giving me more to think about, and maybe i’ll even muster a response.

  4. bekkos Says:

    Hello, Mr. Mann!

    Perhaps we could, in fact, have an interesting and non-depressing talk on the subject, although, right now, I have work to do, and all this blogging is not getting it done. Give me a call sometime; if you don’t have my phone number, you can get it from John Wiesner.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: