The Beauty of Deception

Arthur Davies, "Sleep Lies Perfect in Them," 1908.

I have long had a penchant for somewhat obscure painters from the late 19th and early twentieth centuries. The social upheaval of those times seems even more dramatic in many ways than what we are experiencing today, so the art from those times speaks to me both of that time and of our own. In addition, it seems that pressured, difficult times bring forth timeless human qualities in a vividness rarely found when life is "going easier."

While working at the currently in transition Minnesota Museum of American Art, I came across a book about Arthur Davies that I ended up buying because there wasn't much else out there about him. Among other things, he was a major player in bringing the works of Picasso, Kandinsky, Duchamp, and other European moderns into the U.S. during the 1913 Armory Show, an exhibit that changed the direction of the American art world.

The interesting thing is that, unlike the rest of the group he associated with, The Ashcan School, Arthur Davies did not attempt to paint the ragged, working class city life that had sprung up around him. His paintings were often decidedly otherworldly, as if, like in the image above, what was going on in the world was entirely divorced from what came through his paintbrush.

Indeed, his personal life was a series of relationships with women who were deliberately kept apart from each other. Painting models, patrons, confidants, and lovers - the line between these seemed to blur constantly for Davies, even as he was also able to, somehow, maintain two marriages with children for the final 25 years of his life with almost no one knowing. I can't imagine the amount of energy he wasted keeping this elaborate set of lies together, but I think his paintings are not only beautiful, but instructive to all of us in terms of the ways in which the mind creates divisions, and then tries to maintain them.

The year Davies painted "Sleep Lies Perfect in Them," 1908, was pivot point in his artistic career. As a member of The Eight, his work was part of an exhibit that shook up the New York art scene at the time, and laid the ground for the Armory Show, and the entry of the avant-garde, a few years later. In the meantime, Davies had settled in with his second wife, under an assumed name, and had already met Lizzie Bliss, who not only became a frequent purchaser of his art, but also became a trusted friend, art and business adviser, and possibly more. So, when you look at his life at the time of this painting, it's become the mixture of success and secrecy that followed Davies to the grave.

Deception has many qualities, and among them, elaborate tales certainly is a hallmark feature. So, too, is a sense of being asleep to the truth of a situation, whether you just don't know any better, or you deliberately ignore everything occurring around you. Davies definitely isn't the first artist to create an alternate reality in his art; one could argue that all art is, to some degree or another, a series of alternate realities. However, what's so striking about the art of Arthur Davies is how little they give us a hint of either the turmoil of the times, or the psychological and actual turmoil of his personal life. Filled with young, beautiful women, perfected landscapes, and sensuous colors, Davies' paintings seem almost completely unscathed, as if he was able to channel the paranoid, guilt ridden tenor of his life into a collection of visual dreamscapes beckoning us to come and rest in.

Maybe this is the most instructive thing about Davies' artwork: when you live a life that fails to place truth at the center, you end up needing an elaborate place to rest in. This is why I both love what Arthur Davies created during his artistic life, and also find profoundly sad at the same time. The beauty that can come from deception can never be divorced from the real life consequences of the lies themselves. Richard over at My Buddha is Pink has an interesting post examining lying and contemplating if it's possible to skillfully lie. He's not sure; I do think some situations call for not telling the literal truth, such as has been seen during holocausts where people lie about the location of others to protect them from being murdered. However, when I at most of the lying I have done in my own life, or have seen in others, I have to conclude that it's usually selfish, and not beneficial to anyone involved.

So, the beauty of the image above is really that it can offer us both a respite from our struggles, and also a mirror to see the true nature of our struggles in.

Complicating Liberation Narratives

Richard over at My Buddha is Pink rightly took me to task for a post I made earlier this week about liberating fish. In his current post, he goes into detail about the many unskillful ways in which people try and "liberate" animals. I'm in total agreement with him, even though I still think there are ways to go about freeing trapped, endangered animals without creating more damage than was already occurring.

The beginning of Richard's post introduces his response to mine, and then takes up the fish liberation that was described on Tsem Tulku Rinpoche's blog. He writes:

The gist of the situation is live fish are kept at a market to be sold as food. A group purchases the fish, then takes the fish to a freshwater lake (the fish are freshwater fish) where the fish are released into that lake. The group’s presumption is that it has liberated the fish, alleviating suffering for those fish, and that the fish appreciate this action. Everyone feels good, take pictures, then goes home.

In his lesson to Rahula at Mango Stone, the Buddha told his son that a skillful person is fully aware of the potential consequences of his or her actions. This awareness is achieved through constant reflection on one’s actions prior to their commission, during their commission, and after they have been committed. The Buddha instructs that, while it may appear that an intended act is skillful prior to its occurrence, circumstances may arise during that action in which it becomes clear that the act is in reality unskillful, that it brings harm to self, to others, or to both self and others. Nonetheless, while completing the act, red flags may not be observed, and the act continues to appear skillful. But we must not stop there, as the Buddha guides us to evaluate our actions post commission and observe the consequences. Because it may be later revealed that there were unforeseen harmful consequences and what was initially believed to be skillful action was, in fact, unskillful and should not be committed again.

In the relevant situation, freshwater fish are being released into a freshwater lake. However, the presumption that this is suitable is a huge leap of logic that may ultimately be found to be incorrect. Does the lake have a suitable food source for the fish? Does the lake already play home to the same species of fish? Can the lake’s ecosystem sustain the sudden introduction of more individuals into that environment? Because the lake has a limited food supply, and yet a greater number of individuals dependent on that food supply are suddenly introduced into that environment, what’s the impact? And are their other species in that lake that prior to this release activity had no predator to worry about? Is the new fish introduced into the lake a predator the other life form previously did not need to worry about? Maybe the fish that were released are “happy” and liberated, but what about the other life forms in that lake? Has this action created suffering that previously did not exist?

As a gardener in a region filled with buckthorn, it's been interesting to watch the evolution of my own thinking. I remember years ago, when I was first learning about herbalism, thinking that buckthorn was beneficial because it had medicinal qualities. I didn't want to remove the tough, sharp bushes from my garden, nor did I feel compelled to help others do the same. It felt too much like the way people foolishly treat dandelions, which are both a beneficial medicine and simply beautiful. Sure, they are also everywhere, and in need of some control, but certainly not to the extent of the carpet bombing and hatred many respond to them today.

Interestingly enough though, both dandelions and buckthorn were brought into North America by European settlers. And like those settlers, both of these have taken over, and in the case of buckthorn, taken over in a decidedly oppressive way. There are so many parallels between the destruction of indigenous cultures and the ecological changes that came to the American land; maybe I'll write a whole post on that sometime. Anyway, here are several reasons why buckthorn, which was introduced to the Minnesota landscape innocently enough in the mid to late 19th century, is trouble:

* Out-competes native plants for nutrients, light, and moisture
* Degrades wildlife habitat
* Threatens the future of forests, wetlands, prairies, and other natural habitats
* Contributes to erosion by shading out other plants that grow on the forest floor
* Serves as host to other pests, such as crown rust fungus and soybean aphid
* Forms an impenetrable layer of vegetation
* Lacks "natural controls" like insects or disease that would curb its growth

Certainly, none of this was on the minds of those people who brought this sharp-toothed bush to the state. These people had no thought of all the hours I and countless others would later spend digging up deep-seated roots and getting spiked by lanky branches; they just wanted a nice hedge around their yards. The same can be said of people who free animals into unsuitable environments, creating more misery than was present beforehand. They want to do the right thing, but the situation is more complicated than they realized.

Part of the reason I felt compelled to make the original post in support of the efforts of Rinpoche's group is that I think, too often, we get caught up in all the messy details of our complicated lives, and fail to act at all until it's too late. I'm certainly guilty of over-thinking, and over-analyzing things, wanting to understand all possible angles. It's easy to see how the desire to liberate animals or plants could be completely sidetracked by analysis and meta-analysis of every last possible impact such actions might have in the future. This is why, sometimes, I simply applaud people who are "just doing something," and try not to analyze too much.

Sitting here now, what I'm seeing from both the action done by Rinpoche's group, as well as the comments made by Richard, is a call for balance. We have to reflect on the possible consequences of our actions, or else we simply end up creating more misery. And sometimes we must act, knowing that we'll never have all the answers. Leaning to heavily towards either action or analysis is simply hanging out in a comfort zone, and failing to be fully engaged in your life.

You Can't Save the Planet, People!

After the short Earth Day post I made yesterday, I came across this essay, which tracks some of the history of Earth Day and the all too easy slide it has made into "green consumerism" as world savior approach. This isn't a happy piece of writing, but let's face it, neither is it a happy thing what we've collectively been doing to the planet.

Here is a particularly provocative paragraph to chew on:

Today, right-wing pundits depict environmentalism as an elite hobby that threatens jobs, while many progressive environmentalists cite the potential for “green jobs” to help reignite economic growth. Both views are sorely missing a central element of what has made environmentalism such a compelling counter-hegemonic worldview ever since the 1970s: the promise that reorienting societies toward a renewed harmony with nature can help spur a revolutionary transformation of our world.

I've long found the argument that technology will save us a tired, doomed to failure view. No amount of wind turbines, "green fuels," or "flex" vehicles will make a major dent in the damage being done. Certainly, some of this stuff provides some benefit, but without a completely different individual and collective mindset shift, it all amounts to whipped cream covering a decidedly bad tasting cake.

This morning, I ran across this commentary by Nella Lou over at Smiling Buddha Cabaret that addresses some of the deep structures that need to change in order for radical environmental action to truly occur. I'm not sure I agree with every last point Nella Lou makes, but I think much of what she says is pointing in the right direction.

Here's an introduction to what she addresses in her post:

Thanks to openbuddha on Twitter, this link to an essay by Leo Babauta called society, reimagined came to my attention. Another person Everett Bogue: Putting Leo Babauta’s ‘Society, Reimagine’ Into Practice has taken up the thought as well.

Leo Babauta has given some provocative and interesting ideas for what society “could” be if we were to start from scratch or reimagine a few things.

I’d like to take up his thoughts and add a few of my own. Leo takes a few areas and outlines a little bit about them. Everett Bogue, a person on a minimalist mission of sorts, adds a couple more.

* The car, junked
* Schools, erased
* Sharing vs consumerism
* A digital world
* Health Care, reimagined, in practice.
* Agriculture, reimagined, in practice.

To these I would like to add such meta-categories as:

* Political structures
* Economic systems and structures
* Relational or marriage structures
* Religious structures
* Ecological considerations and nature

If we are going to reimagine society it needs to be at a structural level. Merely shifting around a few things and essentially maintaining much of the status quo will engender the same kinds of problems that now appear but in different arenas. And deep societal structure are intimately tied together.

So, what do I want to say? I guess I'm interested in the way people who call themselves "Buddhists" address, or don't address, these issues. What I find curious is how often people who are dedicated to examining how their minds work, and how their actions impact their relationships and the world around them, often shut down completely when it comes to social concerns like the environment. Or how they sit in dharma centers day after day, year after year, hearing lectures about interconnectedness and how we aren't isolated, solitary selves, and yet when it comes to social issues, it's every man or woman for themselves. "Green consumerism" seems to be enough for many people who say they are Buddhist. In fact, some argue that it's all any one of us can do, and politics and/or social action are no place for spiritual involvement or application. In other words, spiritual practice is separate from social engagement.

I've written about this a lot in the past. Probably have pontificated enough on it in fact. But it continues to baffle me how easy it is for people to minimize, deny, and blame others (to reference Foucault)for problems which they, by the very fact of being human, are complicit in to some degree.

This isn't to say that everything happening on Earth is a result of human misbehavior. Even though Global Warming deniers tend to go to hysterical lengths to make arguments that are basically designed to defend the greedy, sloth-like lifestyles that many of us have developed over the past 100 years or so, they still are right to point out that the planet is much more than the sum total of human action or inaction. One of the things I have learned from socially engaged Buddhist leaders like Thich Nhat Hanh is that those who you would hold as "enemies" also have truth in their stories. It might be deeply, deeply buried, but it's there, somewhere, and being open to finding it together is a road to peace.

At the same time, from a Buddhist perspective, it's beyond foolish to assume that human behavior has either no impact, or a minimal impact on the planet. The few times I've met or spoken with people who say they are Buddhist, and also view things like Global Warming as complete lies, I've found myself at a loss. One could say these people aren't Buddhists, or have no idea what Buddha really taught, and that might be true. But it's too easy of a dismissal, and doesn't help much in terms of addressing the much broader issues that come from the population of dharma folks that see their practice as an individual effort, and who think "going organic" is going to save the planet.

When you get down to it, a large part of the problem probably is tied to the idea of "saving the planet" itself. This mantra, the often unconsciously driving force behind "Green" activities, assumes a separation. It's like the misreading of the Bodhisattva vow to "Liberate all beings," where one thinks there are countless beings they must go out and free. The planet is a completely interdependent, dynamically functioning life of which we are embedded in. There's no way to step outside of it, at least at this point, in order to "do something" to "save" it. Why? Because "it" is always changing, always evolving, and thus any efforts we make to benefit "it" as a whole must be also in accord with what the earth is today, and not what we think it is.

Maybe all of this is terribly depressing. It might even sound like I'm suggesting that efforts are futile, like grains of sand running through your hands. Well, that's not my intent. In fact, it's not even my intent to suggest that activities such as recycling, building wind turbines, and eating organic food should be abandoned. They have their place in all of this. What I am suggesting is that Buddha's teachings are repeatedly pointing us back to those deep structures that lay behind our collective behaviors as humans, and by failing to address these structures both individually, and collectively, we are simply trying to put the cart before the horse.

Happy Earth Day! Remember, You are Not Separate From All that Is

Happy Earth Day everyone! Yes, it's a symbolic holiday, but at least it's an annual reminder. Maybe we should say it everyday, to keep the consumeristic slugs inside each of our heads in check enough to have a healthy planet to live with in the future.

I have a new post that speaks a little to all of this over at Life as a Human. Being "right" with the earth is, in my view, both about what you do as an individual and also what we do collectively. In addition, in true Buddhist spirit, it all comes back to how we think about life on this little rock in space. The more we see how interdependent things are, the better in my view. Because from that understanding has, and will continue to spring the actions, or non-actions, needed to have a healthy planet for all beings.

Adam over at Home Brew Dharma also has a good post about sometime most of us privileged folks take for granted: water. All the privatization going on out there is biting us in the ass, and will only get worse if we keep selling off the rights and control of our water sources. Water and profit making shouldn't be mixed. (Yes, not hard hitting analysis, but if you need hard hitting analysis to understand this, you best get yourself a ladder because the hole you're living in is too deep for me to dig you out of.)

*photo above is looking out on Lake Superior.

Video Kills the Animal Stars

In an odd decision, that clearly shows how strong the disconnect between human suffering and animal suffering is for many in the United States, the Supreme Court struck down a ban on dog fighting videos and other video depicting acts of animal cruelty. It's odd to me, partly because the acts themselves are illegal across the nation. You can't conduct dog fights, but you can sell and purchase videos of them. Somehow, the second degree of separation here allows people to be more at ease with the misery of the dogs involved. They aren't in the room; they're on a screen. It reminds me of comments Howard Zinn repeated made about dropping bombs in World War II. Being in a plane thousands of feet above the ground dehumanized the human victims, and rendered their suffering invisible. And thoughts about tortured animals, destroyed landscapes and ecosystems only came much later, after the damage was done.

I was surprised to read that the sole dissenter on this case was Justice Alito. He's almost always been in agreement with Chief Justice Roberts, to the point of being forgettable.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented, saying the majority’s analysis was built on “fanciful hypotheticals” and would serve to protect “depraved entertainment.” He said it was implausible to suggest that Congress meant to ban depictions of hunting or that the practice amounted to animal cruelty.

Bows to Justice Alito on this one.

I have to say I'm reluctant to limit freedom of speech, which these videos fall under. And I've often said that hate groups, for example, shouldn't be silenced, but held continually accountable for their speech and actions. But dog fighting videos, and others like them, serve no purpose other than as entertainment as far as I'm concerned. And if the Supreme Court doesn't want to restrict them, they should overturn the laws against dog fighting and animal cruelty as well. At least they'd have some consistency in their message.

On a related note, Richard from My Buddha is Pink made some interesting observations on yesterday's post about liberating fish from slaughter. Definitely worth checking out.

Liberating Beings One Bucket at a Time

Here's a few paragraphs about an interesting practice from Tsem Tulku Rinpoche's community in Malaysia:

Once a month Kecharians (kechara members) and guests will put their money together and buy fish from the slaughter market to release. This month, they again purchased 150 kgs of fish, did prayers, blew mantras on to the fish and released them into a nearby large clean lake.

It was a wonderful spiritual and family event. This is arranged under the Kechara Care Dept headed by Liaison Su Ming.

It is something I started to create awareness for the sanctity of all life.

You can see the whole post, with more photos, at Rinpoche's blog.

Some might say this is just symbolic, but I bet those fish don't feel symbolic as they swim away. In any case, it's a great reminder that liberation is a shared experience - the fish need us and we need the fish.

Buddhist Blogosphere

Today, a round up of quality posts for your reading pleasure. First, check out my new post over at Life as a Human about Granny D and social action. Gotta love Granny D!

Next, here's a great post on gardening and intimacy by Genju at 108ZenBooks. Here is a snippet to wet your palate.

I find now a tiny book on my shelf that helps secure the relationship: Teachings of the Insentient by John Daido Loori.

In general, our ecology is based on separation. The teachings (of the Buddhadharma) are about intimacy.

Often when we take on these endeavors, I feel desperate to save things. Save the rose garden, the vegetable garden, the strawberries growing helter-skelter on the fringes of both. Pull every weed, sweep every shaving and dessicated leaf. Sometimes, I’m not sure if I’m saving the garden from damage or forcing a change so I don’t have to see or feel damage. I think in past years, this desperation has prevented intimacy and the reason is ridiculously obvious. Saviours require victims (usually) – a relationship that precludes true intimacy because it is one of power over another. Intimacy requires nothing other than a willingness to be with just what is.

Next is a follow up post Daishin made recently concerning right action and homeless folks. Her original post sparked one by me, which then sparked another by Adam over at Home Brew Dharma. The interconnectedness of the internet in full action.

If you want to study the monkey mind up close, especially that part of it which always wants to be right, step over to Brad Warner's recent post on zazen posture, and read the comments section. People often say "Oh, I have enough drama in my life. I don't need that." Well, maybe. But do you study that drama? Do you see it's roots? And if so, why the hell haven't you plucked them yet? :)

And finally, please check out John's post on ways to help those impacted by the recent earthquake in Tibet. I haven't written about it primarily because so many other Buddhist bloggers have done a good job covering what's going on. Metta to all those suffering over there, as well as to the people of Haiti, and of Chile, still recovering from their own quakes.

*Image from a poster DAVE MATTHEWS BAND COLLAGE CANVAS -BUDDHA
by Robert Lee / Mark Mcdevitt
Check out Methane Studios for more details.