Dear Marco,
Thanks for the note and post!
I agree that certain updates are necessary for today. I also agree that Murray is ultra-relevant now.
Early In the essay I make passing mention of a Murray critique of what, today, we call identity politics. As rooted as he was in his idiomatic culture, and as supportive as he was of the Civil Rights movement, he framed them within the context of rights as an American citizen rather than primarily as part of an identity-grievance group.
That ties into your point about American ideals, which for him were more than just nationality-based; it was part of a cosmopolitan cultural ideal whereby Americans are heirs of the best thought of all times and places, and, at our best, are a cutting-edge extension of European civilization.
With regard to a pessimism and skepticism about the American project, or pessimism per se as rhetorical strategy and approach, he leaned on Kenneth Burke’s distinction between a frame of rejection and a frame of acceptance.
A frame of rejection complains that life is unfair and proclaims it shouldn’t be that way. Murray admits that there have been literary masterpieces written from that frame. A frame of acceptance, in contrast, realizes that life is unfair, that shit is fucked up, yet instead of moaning about it, accepts the heroic challenge to fight for the good, the true, and the beautiful, to approach life with skills honed to a pitch of mastery so that you can improvise on the breaks of life like a champion.
Murray gravitated to a frame of acceptance because (among other reasons I could add) it is the mode of the epic. Murray affirmed life, he rarely complained about it. Others can and have chosen to reject, be skeptical, and pessimistic; he chose otherwise.
Why so will be fodder for our conversation! As will be rooted cosmopolitanism, indeed, as a way forward in a democracy in crisis. I think this two-word philosophical idea encapsulates, in one fell swoop, blue to yellow and turquoise as vMemes in Spiral Dynamics.
Not to be pessimistic, Marco, but I’m not confident that we’ll be able to rustle up more than a handful of people to participate in a live discussion–if that. That’s one reason I thought a duet may be better. But if, based on the response to your post today, there are more likes, comments and feedback than I expect, I’ll be very happy to have been proven wrong.
I feel this way primarily because I considered the the response to the Ralph Ellison-Amiri Baraka content underwhelming. Ellison and Baraka were both better known than Murray. Since folks are unlikely to have read Murray, getting them to dig in his texts to prepare for our session may be a bit too optimistic.
We’ll see. But I’m definitely overjoyed, Marco, that you have taken such a keen interest in Murray’s ideas and work! Cats like you, with intellectual depth and aesthetic appreciation and insight, were Murray’s favorite students.
Cheers,
Greg